Benchmark: Powers of two - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

Outside
var p = [1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512]; for (var n=0;n<10;n++) { var s = (Math.floor(65*0.098)+65)*p[n]; };
Inside
for (var n=0;n<10;n++) { var s = (Math.floor(65*0.098)+65)*Math.pow(2,n); };

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Outside
Inside

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:53.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/53.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 53 on Windows 7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Outside	19080820.0 Ops/sec
Inside	11790918.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its components.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test case. It contains two essential pieces of information:

1. **Name**: The name of the benchmark, which is "Powers of two".
2. **Description**: A brief description of the benchmark, indicating that it tests whether to use an array or a loop to perform calculations.

**Script Preparation Code and Html Preparation Code**

The JSON doesn't provide any script preparation code or HTML preparation code. This suggests that:

* The benchmark doesn't require any setup or initialization code.
* No specific HTML structure is required for the test.

**Test Cases**

There are two individual test cases:

1. **Outside**: This test case uses a traditional `for` loop with an array index (`n`) to calculate the result.
2. **Inside**: This test case uses a simple calculation inside the `for` loop, without using an array or any external data structure.

**Library Usage**

Neither of the test cases explicitly uses a library. However, it's worth noting that both tests use built-in JavaScript functions and operators (e.g., `Math.floor`, `*` operator).

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these test cases.

**Pros and Cons of Approaches**

The two approaches differ in their performance:

1. **Outside**: Using an array index (`n`) can lead to slower performance due to the overhead of array lookups and indexing.
2. **Inside**: Calculating directly inside the `for` loop without using an external data structure might result in faster execution, as it avoids unnecessary iterations.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Outside**:
	+ Pros: Easier to understand, maintain, and debug, especially for developers familiar with traditional loops.
	+ Cons: Might be slower due to array indexing overhead.
* **Inside**:
	+ Pros: Can potentially lead to faster execution, as it avoids unnecessary iterations.
	+ Cons: Requires a good understanding of the calculation and loop behavior.

Other alternatives could include:

1. Using `Array.prototype.forEach` or other array methods instead of traditional loops.
2. Employing advanced optimization techniques like memoization or caching.
3. Utilizing WebAssembly (WASM) for better performance.
4. Optimizing the calculation itself to reduce computational overhead.

Please note that these alternatives would depend on the specific requirements and constraints of the project, as well as the expertise of the development team.

In conclusion, the "Powers of two" benchmark tests whether using an array or a loop leads to faster execution in JavaScript. The results can provide valuable insights into the performance characteristics of different approaches, helping developers make informed decisions about their code's optimization.

Related benchmarks:

Powers of two (version: 0)

If they should be written in an array or in the loop as we go

Comparing performance of: Outside vs Inside

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Outside

Inside

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):