Benchmark: array vs int16array

Script Preparation code:

function getRandomInt(max) {
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(max));
}
var a = [...Array(10000)].map(_ => Math.random(1000000));
var ta = (new Int16Array(10000)).map(_ => Math.random(1000000));

AخA
 
function getRandomInt(max) {  return Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(max));}var a = [...Array(10000)].map(_ => Math.random(1000000));var ta = (new Int16Array(10000)).map(_ => Math.random(1000000));

Tests:

array reverse
a.reverse();
a.reverse();
typedArray reverse
ta.reverse();
ta.reverse();

array i/o

for (let i = 0; i < 10000; ++i)
  a[i] = a[i] + 1;

 
for (let i = 0; i < 10000; ++i)  a[i] = a[i] + 1;

typedArray i/o
for (let i = 0; i < 10000; ++i) ta[i] = ta[i] + 1;
for (let i = 0; i < 10000; ++i)
ta[i] = ta[i] + 1;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Experimental features:

Memory measurements supported only in Chrome.
For precise memory measurements Chrome must be launched with --enable-precise-memory-info flag.
More information: Monitoring JavaScript Memory

Test case name	Result
array reverse
typedArray reverse
array i/o
typedArray i/o

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/133.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 133 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
array reverse	178945.8 Ops/sec
typedArray reverse	426782.0 Ops/sec
array i/o	59370.2 Ops/sec
typedArray i/o	51983.3 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

Overview

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks, providing insights into the performance differences between various approaches.

Benchmark Definition JSON

The provided Benchmark Definition JSON defines a benchmark comparing Array and Int16Array. The script preparation code generates two arrays of size 10,000 with random integers. The HTML preparation code is empty.

Here's what's being tested:

Array vs Int16Array: The benchmark compares the performance of accessing elements in an ordinary Array (a) versus a typed array (Int16Array, ta). Typed arrays are designed to store specific data types, such as integers or floats, and provide better performance and memory efficiency.

Comparison options

Two approaches are compared:

Array access: The benchmark measures the time it takes to reverse an ordinary Array using the reverse() method.
Typed Array access: The benchmark measures the time it takes to perform similar operations on a typed array (Int16Array) using the same reverse() method.

Pros and cons of each approach

Array access:
- Pros: Easier to implement, works with any type of data.
- Cons: Slower performance due to dynamic typing and potential overhead from JavaScript's garbage collection.
Typed Array access:
- Pros: Faster performance, reduced memory usage, and better cache locality.
- Cons: Requires explicit type definitions, may be less flexible.

Library

The getRandomInt function is a simple utility function that generates random integers within a specified range. It's not a library per se, but rather a helper function used to populate the arrays.

Special JavaScript feature or syntax

None are mentioned in the provided code snippet. However, it's worth noting that MeasureThat.net may use other features like Promise or async/await for benchmarking purposes, which would require additional context.

Other alternatives

If you were to rewrite this benchmark with different approaches, some options might include:

Using BigInt instead of integers: This could provide better performance for very large numbers.
Comparing other data structures, such as Set or Map, against Array.
Investigating the impact of array length and density on performance.

Keep in mind that the best approach will depend on your specific use case and requirements.

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks, providing insights into the performance differences between various approaches.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The provided Benchmark Definition JSON defines a benchmark comparing `Array` and `Int16Array`. The script preparation code generates two arrays of size 10,000 with random integers. The HTML preparation code is empty.

Here's what's being tested:

1. **Array vs Int16Array**: The benchmark compares the performance of accessing elements in an ordinary `Array` (`a`) versus a typed array (`Int16Array`, `ta`). Typed arrays are designed to store specific data types, such as integers or floats, and provide better performance and memory efficiency.

**Comparison options**

Two approaches are compared:

1. **Array access**: The benchmark measures the time it takes to reverse an ordinary `Array` using the `reverse()` method.
2. **Typed Array access**: The benchmark measures the time it takes to perform similar operations on a typed array (`Int16Array`) using the same `reverse()` method.

**Pros and cons of each approach**

1. **Array access**:
	* Pros: Easier to implement, works with any type of data.
	* Cons: Slower performance due to dynamic typing and potential overhead from JavaScript's garbage collection.
2. **Typed Array access**:
	* Pros: Faster performance, reduced memory usage, and better cache locality.
	* Cons: Requires explicit type definitions, may be less flexible.

**Library**

The `getRandomInt` function is a simple utility function that generates random integers within a specified range. It's not a library per se, but rather a helper function used to populate the arrays.

**Special JavaScript feature or syntax**

None are mentioned in the provided code snippet. However, it's worth noting that MeasureThat.net may use other features like `Promise` or `async/await` for benchmarking purposes, which would require additional context.

**Other alternatives**

If you were to rewrite this benchmark with different approaches, some options might include:

1. Using `BigInt` instead of integers: This could provide better performance for very large numbers.
2. Comparing other data structures, such as `Set` or `Map`, against `Array`.
3. Investigating the impact of array length and density on performance.

Keep in mind that the best approach will depend on your specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

array vs int16array (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: array reverse vs typedArray reverse vs array i/o vs typedArray i/o

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

array reverse

typedArray reverse