Benchmark: Number vs Number.parseInt vs parseInt

Tests:

Number
Number('1');
Number.parseInt
Number.parseInt('1', 10);
parseInt
parseInt('1', 10);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Number
Number.parseInt
parseInt

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark test and explain what's being tested, compared, and its pros and cons.

**Benchmark Test Overview**

The benchmark test is designed to compare the performance of three different ways to convert a string to a number in JavaScript:

1. `Number()`
2. `Number.parseInt()`
3. `parseInt()` (without arguments)

**What's being tested?**

The test is measuring the execution time and frequency of each conversion method on various browsers, specifically Firefox 94.

**Options compared:**

* `Number()`: This method attempts to convert a string to a number by parsing it as a decimal value.
* `Number.parseInt()`: This method converts a string to a number using the radix (base) parameter. In this case, no radix is specified, so it defaults to base 10.
* `parseInt()`: This is another method that converts a string to a number using the radix parameter.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

* `Number()`: Pros - simple and intuitive; Cons - can lead to unexpected results if the input string cannot be converted to a number, and may perform string parsing which can be slower.
* `Number.parseInt()`: Pros - provides more control over the conversion process, especially when working with different bases; Cons - requires an additional parameter, which may add complexity and overhead.
* `parseInt()`: Pros - similar to `Number.parseInt()` but without the radix parameter; Cons - also requires an additional parameter, which may be seen as less flexible.

**Library or special JavaScript feature:**

None of these methods rely on any specific libraries or special JavaScript features beyond the standard library. The focus is on the fundamental syntax and behavior of each conversion method.

**Other alternatives:**

* `Number()` can be compared to other conversion methods, such as using regular expressions or string manipulation functions.
* `parseInt()` with a radix parameter could be compared to `Number.parseInt()` for its added flexibility.

To run this benchmark test, you would need to prepare the script and HTML files according to the provided JSON configuration. The script should contain the three benchmarking scripts: one for each conversion method. The HTML file would include a script tag referencing the prepared script file, as well as any necessary dependencies or libraries.

The test users can then run the benchmark using the MeasureThat.net website, which will execute the tests on various browsers and report the results. This allows developers to compare the performance of these three conversion methods across different browsers and devices.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:94.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/94.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 94 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Number	31195878.0 Ops/sec
Number.parseInt	47202540.0 Ops/sec
parseInt	57923948.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Number vs Number.parseInt vs parseInt (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Number vs Number.parseInt vs parseInt

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Number

Number.parseInt

parseInt

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):