Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
array vs Float64Array write performance
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
array i/o vs typedArray i/o
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var a = [...Array(100000)].map(_ => Math.random()); var ta = (new Float64Array(100000)).map(_ => Math.random());
Tests:
array i/o
for (let i = 0; i < 100000; ++i) a[i] = a[i] + 1;
typedArray i/o
for (let i = 0; i < 100000; ++i) ta[i] = ta[i] + 1;
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
array i/o
typedArray i/o
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into explaining the benchmark. **Benchmark Overview** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test case on the MeasureThat.net website. The test compares the performance of writing to a regular JavaScript array (`a`) versus a typed array (`Float64Array`). **Options Compared** Two options are compared: 1. **Writing to a regular JavaScript array**: This involves writing values to an array using the `[]` syntax, where each element is initialized with a random value. 2. **Writing to a Float64Array**: This involves writing values to a typed array of 64-bit floating-point numbers (`Float64Array`) using the same syntax as above. **Pros and Cons** * **Regular JavaScript array**: + Pros: Wide support, easy to use, and widely adopted. + Cons: Performance might be slower due to type checking and potential memory allocation issues. * **Float64Array**: + Pros: Optimized for floating-point operations, reduces memory allocations, and can improve performance. + Cons: Less supported than regular JavaScript arrays (not all browsers support it), requires more precise understanding of typed arrays. **Library and Purpose** In this test case, the `Float64Array` is used as a library to compare its performance with regular JavaScript arrays. The purpose of using `Float64Array` is to highlight the benefits of optimized floating-point operations in certain scenarios. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark. **Other Considerations** When choosing between writing to a regular array and a typed array, consider the specific use case and performance requirements: * If you need to perform frequent random access or caching operations on large arrays, `Float64Array` might be a better choice. * If you're working with small arrays or don't require precise floating-point control, a regular JavaScript array might be sufficient. **Other Alternatives** If you're looking for alternatives to MeasureThat.net, consider the following resources: * jsbench.com: A JavaScript performance benchmarking tool. * micro-benchmark.org: A platform for running JavaScript benchmarks. * testbench.js.org: A testing framework with built-in support for benchmarking. These tools and platforms offer similar functionality to MeasureThat.net, allowing you to run and compare different JavaScript benchmarks.
Related benchmarks:
array vs Float64Array (small) 2
array vs Float64Array sort
array vs Float64Array vs mixed array
new Array() vs Array.from() with random data
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?