Benchmark: DataView vs Uint8Array by bytes vs Uint8Array set Uint8Array

Script Preparation code:

var size = 0xFF;
var buf = new ArrayBuffer(size);
var view = new DataView(buf);
var byte = new Uint8Array(buf);

var data = [];

for (let i = 0; i < size; i++) {
    data[i] = 100 * Math.random();
}

var dataBytes = new Uint8Array(data);

Tests:

DataView
for (let i; i < size; i++) { view.setUint8(i, data[i]); }
Uint8Array by byte
for (let i; i < size; i++) { byte[i] = data[i]; }
Uint8Array with set
byte.set(data, 0);
Uint8Array with set other Uint8Array
byte.set(dataBytes, 0);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
DataView
Uint8Array by byte
Uint8Array with set
Uint8Array with set other Uint8Array

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 and its components.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of three approaches to store and retrieve data in a Uint8Array:

1. **DataView**: Using a DataView object to set individual bytes directly on the ArrayBuffer.
2. **Uint8Array by byte**: Storing the data as an array of Uint8Array objects, where each element is a single byte from the original data.
3. **Uint8Array with set**: Using the `set()` method on a Uint8Array object to store the data.

**Library and Purpose**

* None explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, DataView and Uint8Array are built-in JavaScript objects that come with the language itself.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None mentioned in this specific benchmark. The code uses standard JavaScript features such as `let`, `const` (not used here), loops, arrays, and array manipulation methods like `Math.random()` and `set()`. However, it's worth noting that some browsers may have specific implementations of these features that might affect performance.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the three approaches to store and retrieve data in a Uint8Array:

* **DataView**: Using a DataView object to set individual bytes directly on the ArrayBuffer.
	+ Pros: Can be faster for small datasets or when only storing individual bytes, as it avoids creating an additional array of bytes. Also allows for direct access to byte values using `view.getUint8()`.
	+ Cons: Requires more memory because the entire ArrayBuffer is still allocated, and setting individual bytes can be slower due to the overhead of accessing the underlying buffer.
* **Uint8Array by byte**: Storing the data as an array of Uint8Array objects, where each element is a single byte from the original data.
	+ Pros: Can be faster for large datasets or when only storing individual bytes, as it avoids creating a single ArrayBuffer. Also allows for direct access to byte values using `byte[i]`.
	+ Cons: Requires more memory because multiple Uint8Array objects are created, and accessing individual bytes can be slower due to the overhead of array indexing.
* **Uint8Array with set**: Using the `set()` method on a Uint8Array object to store the data.
	+ Pros: Faster than setting individual bytes using `view.set()`, as it uses optimized C++ code under the hood. Also allows for bulk data transfer and random access.
	+ Cons: Can be slower for small datasets or when only storing individual bytes, as it involves more overhead.

**Other Considerations**

* **Cache performance**: The benchmark results may not accurately reflect cache performance, which can have a significant impact on real-world applications.
* **Browser differences**: Browser implementations of these APIs might vary in performance and behavior. This benchmark is specific to Chrome 103 and Windows.
* **Data size**: The benchmark creates an array of random data with a fixed size (`0xFF` bytes). Increasing the dataset size could change the relative performance of each approach.

**Alternatives**

If you want to test other approaches, consider these alternatives:

* Using Buffer objects (available in Node.js): These provide similar functionality to Uint8Array but offer additional features and compatibility with Node.js.
* Utilizing typed arrays like Int32Array or Float64Array: These can be used for storing numerical data and might outperform Uint8Array for certain use cases.
* Employing custom array packing algorithms: Depending on your specific requirements, you might find a more efficient way to pack and unpack data using custom algorithms.

When designing your own benchmarks, keep in mind the importance of:

* Using representative test cases that reflect real-world scenarios
* Measuring relevant performance metrics (e.g., execution time, throughput)
* Considering browser-specific differences and caching performance
* Providing clear explanations of each approach's pros and cons

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/103.0.5060.66 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 103 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
DataView	13657334.0 Ops/sec
Uint8Array by byte	13575746.0 Ops/sec
Uint8Array with set	792209.8 Ops/sec
Uint8Array with set other Uint8Array	5871648.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

DataView vs Uint8Array by bytes vs Uint8Array set Uint8Array (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: DataView vs Uint8Array by byte vs Uint8Array with set vs Uint8Array with set other Uint8Array

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

DataView

Uint8Array by byte

Uint8Array with set

Uint8Array with set other Uint8Array

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):