Run results for: `filter().length` vs. `reduce` vs. `for` fork

Run details:

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/139.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/139.0.0.0

Browser: Chrome 139

Operating system: Windows

Device Platform: Desktop

Date tested: 11 months ago

for loop

46K/s

reduce

32K/s

filter().length

17K/s

View exact numbers

Script Preparation code:

var sample = Array(10000).fill(0).map((_, idx) => idx);
var toSelect = 5000;

Tests:

filter().length
var total = sample.filter(s => s <= toSelect).length;
reduce
var total = sample.reduce((total, id) => total + (id <= toSelect ? 1 : 0), 0);
for loop
var total = 0; for (const id of sample) { if (id <= toSelect) { total++; } }