Run results for: Javascript: reduce VS for with Math.max

Run details:

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/136.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser: Chrome 136

Operating system: Linux

Device Platform: Desktop

Date tested: one year ago

Number 3: use reduce

99.4M/s

Number 2: use for-of iterator

27.1M/s

Number 3: Math.max with spread

13.5M/s

Number 1: use for iterator

11.2M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Number 3: use reduce	99,431,448 Ops/sec
Number 2: use for-of iterator	27,079,168 Ops/sec
Number 3: Math.max with spread	13,515,190 Ops/sec
Number 1: use for iterator	11,200,565 Ops/sec

Script Preparation code:

var list = [261,237,169,165,20,351,108,491,480,465,453,306,280,244,210,391,60,419,391,164,303,31,370,359,208,313,383,219,256,192,314,198,337,198,416,157,462,183,309,193,192,262,244,421,45,204,287,426,239,214];

Tests:

Number 1: use for iterator
let largest = -1; for (let i = 0; i < list.length; i++) { if (list[i] > largest) { largest = list[i]; } }
Number 2: use for-of iterator
let largest = -1; for (const item of list) { if (item > largest) { largest = item; } }
Number 3: use reduce
const largest = list.reduce((a,b) => Math.max(a, b));
Number 3: Math.max with spread
const largest = Math.max(...list);

Run results for: Javascript: reduce VS for with Math.max

Compare the "reduce" method with "for" iteration and "for-of" iteration. We try to find the maximum value in a list of number. I also added Math.max with the spread operator.

Number 1: use for iterator

Number 2: use for-of iterator

Number 3: use reduce

Number 3: Math.max with spread