Benchmark: Array vs Object vs Map vs WeakMap access 22

Script Preparation code:

var map = new Map();
var weakMap = new WeakMap()
var array = [];
var object = {};

Tests:

Map.get
map.get("0");
WeakMap.get
weakMap.get("0")
array[0]
array[0]
object.a
object.a

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Map.get
WeakMap.get
array[0]
object.a

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares the performance of accessing elements in different data structures: Array, Object, Map, and WeakMap. The benchmark is designed to measure the execution time for each access operation.

**Options Compared**

Four options are compared:

1. **Array**: Accessing an element using square brackets (`array[0]`).
2. **Object**: Accessing a property using dot notation (`object.a`).
3. **Map**: Accessing a value using the `get()` method (`map.get("0")`).
4. **WeakMap**: Accessing a value using the `get()` method (`weakMap.get("0")`).

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Array**:
	* Pros: Array access is generally fast, as it can be optimized by the JavaScript engine.
	* Cons: In some cases, accessing an array element can lead to additional overhead due to bounds checking.
2. **Object**:
	* Pros: Object property access can be faster than array access for large numbers of elements.
	* Cons: Property access can lead to slower performance if the object is very large or has many nested properties.
3. **Map**:
	* Pros: Map access is generally faster and more efficient than array or object access, as it uses a hash table data structure.
	* Cons: Map objects are typically used for key-value pairs, not sequential access.
4. **WeakMap**:
	* Pros: WeakMap access is similar to Map access, but it allows for garbage collection of the map entries, which can improve performance in some cases.
	* Cons: WeakMap objects are less common than Map objects and may have different performance characteristics.

**Library Used**

None (all tests use built-in JavaScript data structures).

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

The benchmark uses a simple syntax to access elements in each data structure:

1. **Array**: `array[0]`
2. **Object**: `object.a`
3. **Map**: `map.get("0")`
4. **WeakMap**: `weakMap.get("0")`

These operations are straightforward and do not involve any advanced JavaScript features.

**Other Alternatives**

To further compare the performance of these data structures, alternative approaches could be used:

1. Using a different programming language or framework.
2. Adding more complex operations (e.g., insertion, deletion, iteration) to the benchmark.
3. Using a larger dataset or more elements in each data structure.
4. Testing with different browsers, operating systems, or devices.

These alternatives can help provide a more comprehensive understanding of the performance characteristics of each data structure and highlight potential bottlenecks or areas for optimization.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/99.0.4844.74 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 99 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Map.get	18151342.0 Ops/sec
WeakMap.get	16539971.0 Ops/sec
array[0]	18145922.0 Ops/sec
object.a	18158314.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Array vs Object vs Map vs WeakMap access 22 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Map.get vs WeakMap.get vs array[0] vs object.a

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Map.get

WeakMap.get

array[0]

object.a

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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