Benchmark: PutImageData vs DrawImage Large

HTML Preparation code:

<canvas id='master' width='1000' height='1000'></canvas>
<canvas id='pid' width='1000' height='1000'></canvas>
<canvas id='pid2' width='1000' height='1000'></canvas>

AخA
 
<canvas id='master' width='1000' height='1000'></canvas>
<canvas id='pid' width='1000' height='1000'></canvas>
<canvas id='pid2' width='1000' height='1000'></canvas>

Script Preparation code:

var canvas = document.getElementById('master');
var ctx = canvas.getContext('2d');
var pid = document.getElementById('pid').getContext('2d');
var pid2 = document.getElementById('pid2').getContext('2d');
var imgData;
var width = 1000;
var height = 1000;
ctx.width = width;
ctx.height = height;
ctx.fillStyle = "red";

// DRAW SOME BLOCKS
for (let i=0; i<width; i+=50) {
  ctx.fillRect(i,0,50,50);
  ctx.fillRect(i,(height/2)-25,50,50);
  ctx.fillRect(i,height-50,50,50);
}
for (let i=0; i<height; i+=50) {
  ctx.fillRect(0,i,50,50);
  ctx.fillRect((width/2)-25,i,50,50);
  ctx.fillRect(width-50,i,50,50);
}

// PRE-COPY IMG DATA
imgData = ctx.getImageData(0,0,width,height);

​x
 
var canvas = document.getElementById('master');var ctx = canvas.getContext('2d');var pid = document.getElementById('pid').getContext('2d');var pid2 = document.getElementById('pid2').getContext('2d');var imgData;var width = 1000;var height = 1000;ctx.width = width;ctx.height = height;ctx.fillStyle = "red";​// DRAW SOME BLOCKSfor (let i=0; i<width; i+=50) {  ctx.fillRect(i,0,50,50);  ctx.fillRect(i,(height/2)-25,50,50);  ctx.fillRect(i,height-50,50,50);}for (let i=0; i<height; i+=50) {  ctx.fillRect(0,i,50,50);  ctx.fillRect((width/2)-25,i,50,50);  ctx.fillRect(width-50,i,50,50);}​// PRE-COPY IMG DATAimgData = ctx.getImageData(0,0,width,height);​

Tests:

DrawImage copy canvas -> canvas
pid.drawImage(canvas,0,0);
pid.drawImage(canvas,0,0);
PutImageData copy imgData -> canvas
pid2.putImageData(imgData,0,0);
pid2.putImageData(imgData,0,0);
PutImageData copy canvas -> imgData -> canvas
let imgDataLocal = ctx.getImageData(0,0,width,height); pid2.putImageData(imgDataLocal,0,0);
let imgDataLocal = ctx.getImageData(0,0,width,height);
pid2.putImageData(imgDataLocal,0,0);

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
DrawImage copy canvas -> canvas
PutImageData copy imgData -> canvas
PutImageData copy canvas -> imgData -> canvas

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:125.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/125.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 125 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
DrawImage copy canvas -> canvas	181618.1 Ops/sec
PutImageData copy imgData -> canvas	570.8 Ops/sec
PutImageData copy canvas -> imgData -> canvas	345.3 Ops/sec

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

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

Benchmark Definition and Test Cases

The benchmark is designed to compare three different approaches for copying image data from one canvas to another:

DrawImage: Using the drawImage method of the context object to draw an image on another canvas.
PutImageData: Using the putImageData method of the context object to paste image data onto a canvas.
Local Image Data Copy: Creating a local copy of the image data using the get imageData method, and then pasting it onto another canvas.

Options Compared

The three approaches are compared in terms of their execution time (measured in executions per second).

Pros and Cons of Each Approach

DrawImage:
- Pros: Simple to implement, efficient for small images.
- Cons: May not be suitable for large images due to memory constraints and performance issues.
PutImageData:
- Pros: Suitable for large images, allows for more control over image manipulation.
- Cons: May have performance overhead due to the need to store image data in a buffer.
Local Image Data Copy:
- Pros: Efficient for small images, avoids memory constraints and performance issues associated with drawImage.
- Cons: Requires more code and may be slower than other approaches.

Library and Purpose

None of the test cases rely on any specific libraries beyond the standard JavaScript library. However, it's worth noting that the Canvas API is a modern web standard for rendering 2D graphics in HTML5.

Special JS Feature or Syntax

The benchmark does not explicitly use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond the standard JavaScript library and Canvas API.

Other Alternatives

If you're looking for alternative approaches to copying image data, you may consider:

CanvasRenderingContext2D.createImageData: This method creates a new 2D image data object that can be used as an argument to putImageData.
Web Workers: You can use Web Workers to offload image processing tasks to separate threads, potentially improving performance.
GPU Acceleration: Modern browsers support GPU acceleration for graphics rendering, which may improve performance for complex image processing tasks.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have their own trade-offs and requirements, such as additional setup or complexity in implementation.

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

**Benchmark Definition and Test Cases**

The benchmark is designed to compare three different approaches for copying image data from one canvas to another:

1. **DrawImage**: Using the `drawImage` method of the `context` object to draw an image on another canvas.
2. **PutImageData**: Using the `putImageData` method of the `context` object to paste image data onto a canvas.
3. **Local Image Data Copy**: Creating a local copy of the image data using the `get imageData` method, and then pasting it onto another canvas.

**Options Compared**

The three approaches are compared in terms of their execution time (measured in executions per second).

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **DrawImage**:
	* Pros: Simple to implement, efficient for small images.
	* Cons: May not be suitable for large images due to memory constraints and performance issues.
2. **PutImageData**:
	* Pros: Suitable for large images, allows for more control over image manipulation.
	* Cons: May have performance overhead due to the need to store image data in a buffer.
3. **Local Image Data Copy**:
	* Pros: Efficient for small images, avoids memory constraints and performance issues associated with `drawImage`.
	* Cons: Requires more code and may be slower than other approaches.

**Library and Purpose**

None of the test cases rely on any specific libraries beyond the standard JavaScript library. However, it's worth noting that the `Canvas` API is a modern web standard for rendering 2D graphics in HTML5.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The benchmark does not explicitly use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond the standard JavaScript library and Canvas API.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to copying image data, you may consider:

1. **CanvasRenderingContext2D.createImageData**: This method creates a new 2D image data object that can be used as an argument to `putImageData`.
2. **Web Workers**: You can use Web Workers to offload image processing tasks to separate threads, potentially improving performance.
3. **GPU Acceleration**: Modern browsers support GPU acceleration for graphics rendering, which may improve performance for complex image processing tasks.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have their own trade-offs and requirements, such as additional setup or complexity in implementation.

Related benchmarks:

PutImageData vs DrawImage Large (version: 0)

copying canvas with PutImageData vs DrawImage

Comparing performance of: DrawImage copy canvas -> canvas vs PutImageData copy imgData -> canvas vs PutImageData copy canvas -> imgData -> canvas

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

DrawImage copy canvas -> canvas

PutImageData copy imgData -> canvas

PutImageData copy canvas -> imgData -> canvas

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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