Benchmark: hypotvssqrtpowervssqrtxi

Script Preparation code:

var x = 100;
var y = 100;

Tests:

hypot
eval(""); var r = Math.hypot(x, y);
sqrtpower
eval(""); var r = Math.sqrt(x ** 2 + y ** 2);
sqrt xi
eval(""); var r = Math.sqrt(x * x + y * y);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
hypot
sqrtpower
sqrt xi

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its various components.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided `benchmark.json` file defines a single benchmark named "hypotvssqrtpowervssqrtxi". This name suggests that the benchmark is comparing different approaches to calculating the length of a vector using either the `Math.hypot()` function or the power method. The description field seems to be filler text, as it's not being used in the actual benchmark.

**Script Preparation Code**

The `Script Preparation Code` section sets up two variables, `x` and `y`, both initialized with the value 100. This code is executed before each test case.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no `Html Preparation Code` provided, which means that the HTML environment for running these benchmarks does not need to be set up.

**Individual Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of three test cases:

1. **hypot**: Calculates the length of a vector using `Math.hypot(x, y)`.
2. **sqrtpower**: Calculates the length of a vector using `Math.sqrt(x ** 2 + y ** 2)`. Note that this uses exponentiation (`**`) instead of multiplication.
3. **sqrt xi**: Calculates the length of a vector using `Math.sqrt(x * x + y * y)`.

Now, let's discuss the options compared:

*   **Math.hypot() vs. power method (sqrtpower)**: Both approaches aim to calculate the same result but use different methods.
    *   **Pros of Math.hypot():** It's a well-established function that might be more efficient due to its built-in support in JavaScript engines. However, its performance can vary depending on the engine and hardware.
    *   **Cons of Math.hypot():** Some implementations might not use SIMD (Single Instruction, Multiple Data) instructions for efficiency, which could lead to slower results compared to the power method.
    *   **Pros of power method (sqrtpower):** This approach can utilize SIMD instructions more effectively, potentially leading to better performance. However, it may require additional library support or optimization.
    *   **Cons of power method:** It's not a built-in function in JavaScript and might be slower due to the need for exponentiation (`**`) instead of multiplication.
*   **Math.sqrt() vs. power method (sqrt xi)**: Both methods are calculating the square root of a sum, but they differ in how it's implemented.
    *   **Pros of Math.sqrt():** It's likely to be faster and more efficient than the power method due to its built-in implementation in JavaScript engines.
    *   **Cons of Math.sqrt():** As with `Math.hypot()`, performance can vary depending on the engine and hardware. The power method might lead to better results due to SIMD support.

**Libraries**

None of the provided benchmark cases explicitly use a library, but they do utilize built-in JavaScript functions:

*   **Math.hypot():** Built-in function in modern JavaScript engines.
*   **Math.sqrt():** Built-in function in modern JavaScript engines.
*   **Exponentiation (`**`):** Also a built-in operator in JavaScript.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None of the provided benchmark cases explicitly use special JavaScript features like async/await, promises, or classes. They are designed to focus on the core calculation logic rather than showcasing advanced language features.

**Alternatives**

The alternatives to these benchmarks would be other approaches to calculating vector lengths:

*   **Linear algebra libraries:** Libraries like MathJS, NumJS, or SciJS provide optimized implementations for various linear algebra operations, which could be used as alternatives.
*   **Native code optimizations:** Implementing the calculations in native code using a low-level language like C++ or Assembly could result in better performance. However, this would require more expertise and infrastructure.

To run these benchmarks, you can execute the script preparation code (with `x` and `y` set to 100) in your preferred JavaScript environment, followed by the test cases. The results will show which approach performs best for each calculation method.

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/102.0.4972.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 102 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
hypot	1213470.1 Ops/sec
sqrtpower	1270929.2 Ops/sec
sqrt xi	1005053.6 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

hypotvssqrtpowervssqrtxi (version: 0)

argiuaegioaergjioaerjgioaejgioaerjg

Comparing performance of: hypot vs sqrtpower vs sqrt xi

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

hypot

sqrtpower

sqrt xi

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):