Run results for: new Intl.DateTimeFormat vs cached Intl.DateTimeFormat

Run details:

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 14; SM-A047F Build/UP1A.231005.007) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Chrome/139.0.7258.158 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser: Chrome Mobile 139

Operating system: Android

Device Platform: Mobile

Date tested: 11 months ago

cached Intl.DateTimeFormat.format()

65K/s

cached Intl.DateTimeFormat.formatToParts()

28K/s

new Intl.DateTimeFormat.formatToParts

1K/s

new Intl.DateTimeFormat.format()

1K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ cached Intl.DateTimeFormat.format()	64,653 Ops/sec
cached Intl.DateTimeFormat.formatToParts()	28,236 Ops/sec
new Intl.DateTimeFormat.formatToParts	1,299 Ops/sec
new Intl.DateTimeFormat.format()	1,177 Ops/sec

Script Preparation code:

const TWO_DIGIT = '2-digit';

var options = {
      month: TWO_DIGIT,
      year: 'numeric',
      day: TWO_DIGIT,
      hour: TWO_DIGIT,
      hour12: false,
      minute: TWO_DIGIT,
      second: TWO_DIGIT,
    }

var cached = new Intl.DateTimeFormat('en-US', options);

Tests:

new Intl.DateTimeFormat.format()
new Intl.DateTimeFormat('en-US', options).format(new Date());
cached Intl.DateTimeFormat.format()
cached.format(new Date());
new Intl.DateTimeFormat.formatToParts
new Intl.DateTimeFormat('en-US', options).formatToParts(new Date());
cached Intl.DateTimeFormat.formatToParts()
cached.formatToParts(new Date());