Benchmark: Array.sort() vs Math.min / Math.max 4 elements

HTML Preparation code:

const arr = [2,35,67,3];

Script Preparation code:

const arr = [2,35,67,3];

Tests:

Array.sort
const arr = [2,35,67,3]; const a = arr.sort(); const min = a[0]; const max = a[1];
Math min and max
const arr = [2,35,67,3]; const min = Math.min(...arr); const max = Math.max(...arr);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.sort
Math min and max

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the explanation of the provided JSON benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is defined in two parts:

1. **Script Preparation Code**: This code snippet is executed before running the benchmark. In this case, it creates an array `arr` with four elements: `[2, 35, 67, 3]`.
2. **Html Preparation Code**: Similar to the script preparation code, this HTML snippet is also executed before running the benchmark. It sets the value of the `const arr` variable to the same array as in the script preparation code.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares two approaches for finding the minimum and maximum values in an array:

1. **Array.sort()**: This method sorts the entire array and then returns a new array containing the first element (minimum) and the last element (maximum).
2. **Math.min / Math.max**: These functions find the minimum and maximum values of an array without sorting it.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Array.sort()**:
	+ Pros: Can be used to sort the entire array, which might be useful in certain scenarios.
	+ Cons: Sorts the entire array, which can be slow for large arrays. Also, this approach finds both minimum and maximum values, but it returns them in an arbitrary order (the first element is the minimum, and the last element is the maximum).
* **Math.min / Math.max**:
	+ Pros: Faster than sorting the entire array. Finds only the minimum and maximum values without sorting.
	+ Cons: Might not be suitable if you need to sort the entire array.

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library usage in this benchmark, but it's likely that the `Array` object and its methods (like `sort()`) are part of the standard JavaScript library.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark. It only uses standard JavaScript functions and variables.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these two approaches, consider the following:

* If you need to sort the entire array or perform other operations on it after finding the minimum and maximum values, `Array.sort()` might be a better choice.
* If you're working with large arrays and only need to find the minimum and maximum values without sorting the entire array, `Math.min / Math.max` is likely to be faster.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other alternatives for finding the minimum and maximum values in an array include:

* Using `Array.prototype.reduce()` method, which can be used to find both the minimum and maximum values in a single pass through the array.
* Using a custom implementation of min-max algorithms, such as using binary search or heap data structures.

However, these alternatives are not typically used for simple benchmarking like this one.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/86.0.4240.198 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 86 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.sort	5054711.0 Ops/sec
Math min and max	2866702.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Array.sort() vs Math.min / Math.max 4 elements (version: 0)

Array.sort() vs Math.min / Math.max - array with 4 elements

Comparing performance of: Array.sort vs Math min and max

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.sort

Math min and max

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):