Benchmark: powoaetuheu12321aeuo

Tests:

1.1**10
var x = Math.pow(1.1,10);
1.1**100
var x = Math.pow(1.1,100);
1.1**1000
var x = Math.pow(1.1,1000);
2**1000
var x = Math.pow(2,1000);
1.1**10000
var x = Math.pow(1.1,10000);
73**10000
var x = Math.pow(73,10000);
var x = Math.pow(73.123,10023230);
var x = Math.pow(73.123,10023230);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
1.1**10
1.1**100
1.1**1000
2**1000
1.1**10000
73**10000
var x = Math.pow(73.123,10023230);

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/87.0.4280.88 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 87 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
1.1**10	8280401.0 Ops/sec
1.1**100	8225136.0 Ops/sec
1.1**1000	8173223.5 Ops/sec
2**1000	8184810.5 Ops/sec
1.1**10000	8156430.0 Ops/sec
73**10000	8203124.5 Ops/sec
var x = Math.pow(73.123,10023230);	8236119.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

The provided JSON represents a microbenchmark test on MeasureThat.net, where users can compare different JavaScript options for calculating powers of numbers. The main focus is on understanding the performance differences between various approaches to exponentiation.

**Options being compared:**

1. **Native `Math.pow()`**: This is the standard JavaScript method for calculating powers of numbers.
2. **`1.1**10`, `73**10000`, etc.: These are examples of exponents calculated using a syntax similar to `1.1 ^ 10`. In modern browsers, this syntax is supported as part of the ECMAScript language specification.

**Pros and cons:**

* **Native `Math.pow()`**: Pros:
	+ Fastest and most reliable method for calculating powers of numbers.
	+ Widely supported across different browsers and versions.
* Cons:
	+ May not be optimized for performance, especially for large exponents.
* `1.1**10`, `73**10000`, etc.: Pros:
	+ Can be faster than native `Math.pow()` for certain edge cases (e.g., very large or very small numbers).
	+ More concise and expressive syntax for exponentiation.
* Cons:
	+ May not work across all browsers and versions, especially older ones.
	+ Requires careful handling to avoid rounding errors or other issues.

**Library usage:**

None of the provided test cases explicitly use a JavaScript library. The `Math.pow()` method is part of the ECMAScript standard library, which is widely supported across different browsers and environments.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

The test cases utilize the exponentiation syntax `1.1**10`, `73**10000`, etc., which is supported in modern JavaScript engines as part of the ECMAScript language specification (ES6+). This syntax is designed to be concise and expressive, making it easier to write code for complex calculations.

**Other alternatives:**

For those interested in exploring alternative methods for exponentiation, here are a few examples:

* **`Math.exp()`**: Can be used with the `Math.log()` function to calculate powers of numbers. However, this method may not be as efficient or accurate as native `Math.pow()`.
* **`BigInt`**: In some browsers and environments, the `BigInt` type can be used to perform arbitrary-precision arithmetic, including exponentiation. This method provides an alternative approach for calculating large exponents.
* **Third-party libraries**: There are various third-party libraries available that provide optimized implementations of exponentiation, such as the `fast-expo` library in Node.js.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not be supported across all browsers and environments, so it's essential to consider the specific requirements and constraints of your project when choosing an approach.

Related benchmarks:

powoaetuheu12321aeuo (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 1.110 vs 1.1100 vs 1.11000 vs 21000 vs 1.110000 vs 7310000 vs var x = Math.pow(73.123,10023230);

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

1.1**10

1.1**100

1.1**1000

2**1000

1.1**10000

73**10000

var x = Math.pow(73.123,10023230);

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

powoaetuheu12321aeuo (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 1.1**10 vs 1.1**100 vs 1.1**1000 vs 2**1000 vs 1.1**10000 vs 73**10000 vs var x = Math.pow(73.123,10023230);

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

1.1**10

1.1**100

1.1**1000

2**1000

1.1**10000

73**10000

var x = Math.pow(73.123,10023230);

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Comparing performance of: 1.110 vs 1.1100 vs 1.11000 vs 21000 vs 1.110000 vs 7310000 vs var x = Math.pow(73.123,10023230);