Benchmark: Math.min vs ternary

Script Preparation code:

a = 1;
b = 2;

Tests:

Math.min
Math.min(a, b)
ternary
a < b ? a : b

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Math.min
ternary

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/92.0.4515.159 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 92 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Math.min	2839833.5 Ops/sec
ternary	2727506.2 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 provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches to find the minimum value between two numbers:

1. The built-in `Math.min` function in JavaScript.
2. A ternary operator (`a < b ? a : b`) that achieves the same result without using the `Math` library.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark is comparing two options:

* Using the built-in `Math.min` function.
* Using a ternary operator to achieve the same result.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **Math.min**: This approach uses the built-in JavaScript function to find the minimum value. It's likely to be implemented in native code, which can result in better performance compared to other approaches. However:
	+ Requires access to the `Math` library.
	+ May not be as intuitive or familiar to developers who don't use this library often.
* **Ternary Operator**: This approach uses a ternary operator (`a < b ? a : b`) to achieve the same result. It's a concise and easy-to-understand way to express the logic, but:
	+ May require more computational resources or overhead due to the complexity of the expression.
	+ Can be less readable or maintainable for developers who aren't familiar with this syntax.

**Library Used**

The `Math` library is used in the first approach (`Math.min(a, b)`). The `Math` library provides a set of mathematical functions and constants that are built into JavaScript. Its primary purpose is to provide a standardized way to perform mathematical operations in JavaScript.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There's no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. It's just a comparison between two approaches using standard JavaScript features.

**Other Considerations**

When testing performance benchmarks like this, it's essential to consider the following factors:

* **Browser and Platform Variability**: Different browsers and platforms can have varying levels of optimization, rendering engines, and system resources, which can affect performance.
* **Cache Effects**: Results may be influenced by caching mechanisms, such as browser cache or disk cache.
* **Optimization Techniques**: Some browsers or environments might apply optimizations that could skew the results (e.g., inlining, register blocking, etc.).

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for this benchmark could include:

* Using a different built-in JavaScript function, such as `Math.max` or `Array.prototype.indexOf`.
* Implementing a custom algorithm using loops or bitwise operations.
* Testing with additional inputs, such as negative numbers, floating-point values, or large integers.

Keep in mind that the choice of alternatives depends on the specific goals and requirements of the benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

Math.min vs ternary (version: 0)

native Math.min versus ternary operator

Comparing performance of: Math.min vs ternary

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Math.min

ternary

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):