Benchmark: lmul vs standard

Script Preparation code:

var x = parseInt(Math.random() * 100);
var y = parseInt(Math.random() * 100);

Tests:

lmul
Math.lmul(x, y);
Standard
x * y

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lmul
Standard

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares the performance of two approaches: using `Math.lmul` (long multiplication) and the standard multiplication operator (`*`). The benchmark is designed to measure which approach is faster.

**Options Compared**

There are only two options being compared:

1. **Standard Multiplication**: This is the traditional way of multiplying two numbers in JavaScript, represented by the expression `x * y`.
2. **`Math.lmul` (Long Multiplication)**: This is a specialized multiplication function that uses bitwise operations to perform long multiplication, which can be more efficient for certain types of calculations.

**Pros and Cons**

**Standard Multiplication**

Pros:

* Wide support across different browsers and platforms.
* Easy to understand and implement.
* No additional dependencies or libraries required.

Cons:

* May be slower than `Math.lmul` due to the overhead of the traditional multiplication algorithm.
* Can lead to overflow errors for large numbers.

**`Math.lmul` (Long Multiplication)**

Pros:

* Can be faster than standard multiplication, especially for large numbers.
* Reduces overflow risks compared to traditional multiplication.

Cons:

* May not work as expected in older browsers or platforms that don't support the `lmul` function.
* Requires additional dependencies or libraries, which can increase complexity.

**Library: Math.lmul**

The `Math.lmul` function is a specialized multiplication function that uses bitwise operations to perform long multiplication. It is implemented in WebAssembly and is supported by some browsers and platforms. The library provides an optimized implementation of the multiplication algorithm that can be faster than traditional multiplication for certain types of calculations.

**Special JS Feature: Bitwise Operations**

The `Math.lmul` function relies on bitwise operations, which are a special set of operations in JavaScript that manipulate binary digits (bits). These operations are useful for performance-critical code and can provide significant speedups for certain types of calculations. However, they may not be supported by older browsers or platforms.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to compare the performance of different multiplication algorithms, here are some other alternatives:

* **`Math.imul`**: This is another specialized multiplication function that uses integer multiplication to perform long multiplication.
* **Native Assembly Code**: You can also implement a custom multiplication algorithm in native assembly code, which can provide optimal performance but requires knowledge of low-level programming and browser-specific optimization techniques.
* **Specialized libraries**: There are specialized libraries available that provide optimized implementations of mathematical functions, including multiplication. However, these libraries may add complexity to your project.

In summary, the benchmark compares the performance of two approaches: using `Math.lmul` (long multiplication) and the standard multiplication operator (`*`). The `Math.lmul` function provides an optimized implementation of the multiplication algorithm that can be faster than traditional multiplication for certain types of calculations.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/56.0.2924.87 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 56 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lmul	0.0 Ops/sec
Standard	3787127.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

lmul vs standard (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lmul vs Standard

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lmul

Standard

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):