Benchmark: JS BigInt multiply vs addition

Script Preparation code:

var bigInt1 = BigInt("1000000000000");
var bigInt2 = BigInt("10000000000001000000000000");

Tests:

multiply
c = bigInt1 * bigInt1 - bigInt1
addition
d= bigInt2+ bigInt1+bigInt1+2n

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
multiply
addition

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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/103.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 103 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
multiply	2050943.5 Ops/sec
addition	2144892.8 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark that compares the performance of two approaches:

1. Multiplication using `BigInt` (Big Integers) data type.
2. Addition with numbers and potential use of `n` notation for big integers.

**Options compared:**

There are two test cases:

* **Multiply**: Tests the multiplication operation using `BigInt`. Specifically, it checks the performance of `bigInt1 * bigInt1 - bigInt1`.
* **Addition**: Tests the addition operation with numbers and potential use of `n` notation for big integers. It specifically checks the performance of `d= bigInt2+ bigInt1+bigInt1+2n`.

**Pros and Cons:**

**BigInt (Multiply)**

Pros:

* **Accuracy**: Big Integers provide exact mathematical calculations, which is essential for many applications.
* **Efficient representation**: BigInts can represent very large integers without losing precision.

Cons:

* **Performance overhead**: Working with BigInts can be slower than using numbers due to additional memory allocation and management required.

**n notation (Addition)**

Pros:

* **Performance benefits**: Using `n` notation can provide better performance for certain operations by allowing JavaScript engines to use more efficient arithmetic algorithms.
* **Compatibility**: This syntax is widely supported in modern browsers.

Cons:

* **Limited compatibility**: Some older browsers or environments might not support this syntax, which could lead to issues.
* **Readability**: The `n` notation can make code harder to read and understand for some developers.

**Library:**

In the provided benchmark, the `BigInt` data type is used. BigInts are a built-in JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2020 (ES10). They provide support for large integers with arbitrary precision, which is essential for many numerical computations.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

The `n` notation in the addition test case uses a proprietary syntax to represent big integers. This syntax is specific to Google's V8 JavaScript engine and some other custom implementations. It allows the engine to use more efficient arithmetic algorithms, but its usage can be problematic if not supported by all browsers or environments.

**Alternative approaches:**

Other alternatives for comparison could include:

* Using libraries like `decimal.js` or `mathjs` that provide alternative numeric data types with different trade-offs in terms of performance and accuracy.
* Implementing custom numerical algorithms using bitwise operations, which can be fast but less readable and more error-prone.
* Comparing the performance of multiple JavaScript engines (e.g., V8, SpiderMonkey) to identify potential differences in implementation.

Keep in mind that each alternative approach will have its own set of pros and cons, which may affect the overall result of the benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

JS BigInt multiply vs addition (version: 0)

Compare Number vs BigInt for big numbers

Comparing performance of: multiply vs addition

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

multiply

addition

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):