Run results for: Array.find vs. Set.has

Run details:

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/137.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser: Chrome 137

Operating system: Mac OS X 10.15.7

Device Platform: Desktop

Date tested: one year ago

Benchmark engine: Benchmark.js

Set.has existing

172.6M/s

Set.has non-Existing

164.6M/s

Array.find existing

100.8M/s

Array.find non-existing

81.0M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Set.has existing	172,555,872 Ops/sec
Set.has non-Existing	164,557,872 Ops/sec
Array.find existing	100,811,920 Ops/sec
Array.find non-existing	81,014,248 Ops/sec

Script Preparation code:

const SOURCE_DATA = ['one', 'two', 'three', 'four', 'five', 'six'];
const arr = Array.from(SOURCE_DATA);
const set = new Set(SOURCE_DATA);
const existingItem = 'three';
const nonExistingItem = 'nine';
window.testData = {
  SOURCE_DATA,
  arr,
  set,
  existingItem,
  nonExistingItem
};

Tests:

Array.find existing
window.testData.arr.find(e => e === window.testData.existingItem);
Array.find non-existing
window.testData.arr.find(e => e === window.testData.nonExistingItem);
Set.has existing
window.testData.set.has(window.testData.existingItem)
Set.has non-Existing
window.testData.set.has(window.testData.nonExistingItem)

Run results for: Array.find vs. Set.has

Compares a performance of Array.find on a small number of items

Array.find existing

Array.find non-existing

Set.has existing

Set.has non-Existing