Benchmark: Sort Speed Chrome

Script Preparation code:

var length = 1000000
var array = new Array(length / 2).fill().map(() => Math.round(Math.random() * length))
array = array.concat(array)
array.unshift(length + 1)
var defaultSort = [...array]
var basicSort = [...array]

Tests:

default sort
defaultSort.sort()
basic sort
basicSort.sort((a,b) => a-b)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
default sort
basic sort

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/128.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 128 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

basic sort

106/s

default sort

99/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ basic sort	106 Ops/sec
default sort	99 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The benchmark in question is designed to measure the speed of sorting algorithms in JavaScript.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates two arrays:

* `defaultSort`: an array created using the default `Array` constructor, with 500,000 elements generated randomly, concatenated to itself, and then shifted by one element.
* `basicSort`: an array created using the same method as `defaultSort`, but with a custom sorting function applied: `(a,b) => a-b`. This is likely being used to test the performance of this specific sorting algorithm.

The purpose of creating these two arrays is to create different starting points for testing the speed of sorting algorithms.

**Sorting Algorithms**

There are two main sorting algorithms being tested in this benchmark:

* **Default Sort**: The built-in `Array.prototype.sort()` method, which uses a variation of the quicksort algorithm.
* **Basic Sort**: A custom sorting function using the `(a,b) => a-b` syntax, likely implementing a variant of the merge sort or insertion sort algorithm.

**Library Usage**

The benchmark does not explicitly use any external libraries for its test cases. However, it's worth noting that modern JavaScript environments often rely on internalized versions of these algorithms, which may be implemented in native code.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

In this benchmark, there are no special features or syntax used that would require additional explanation.

**Options Compared**

The two main options being compared are:

* **Default Sort**: Uses the built-in `Array.prototype.sort()` method.
* **Basic Sort**: Uses a custom sorting function `(a,b) => a-b`.

Pros and Cons of Each Approach:

* **Default Sort**:
	+ Pros: Highly optimized, widely supported, and typically very fast.
	+ Cons: May be slower than custom implementations for specific use cases.
* **Basic Sort**:
	+ Pros: Customizable, potentially faster for certain algorithms or datasets.
	+ Cons: Requires manual implementation of the sorting algorithm, may not be as efficient as internalized versions.

**Considerations**

When choosing between these two approaches, consider the following:

* If you need a simple, widely supported sorting solution, use the default `Array.prototype.sort()` method.
* If you have specific requirements or performance needs for your application, consider implementing a custom sorting algorithm like `(a,b) => a-b`.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative sorting algorithms or libraries, here are some popular options:

* **Libraries**: Consider using existing libraries like `lodash.sort`, `mergeSort`, or `insertionSort` for your sorting needs.
* **Custom Implementations**: Experiment with implementing your own sorting algorithms, such as merge sort, quicksort, or heapsort.

Keep in mind that the performance of these alternatives may vary depending on your specific use case and requirements.

Sort Speed Chrome (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `default sort vs basic sort`

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

default sort

basic sort

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Sort Speed Chrome (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: default sort vs basic sort

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

default sort

basic sort

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `default sort vs basic sort`