Benchmark: includes() in an array vs includes() in a string 2

Script Preparation code:

const shuffle = ([...arr]) => {
  let m = arr.length;
  while (m) {
    const i = Math.floor(Math.random() * m--);
    [arr[m], arr[i]] = [arr[i], arr[m]];
  }
  return arr;
};

var ids = shuffle(Array(40000).fill().map((_, i) => ++i));
var serializedIds = `,${ids.join()},`;
var searchIds = [1, 20000, 40000, 60000];
var searchSerializedIds = searchIds.map(id => `,${id},`);

Tests:

Array.includes()
searchIds.map(id => ids.includes(id));
String.includes()
searchSerializedIds.map(id => serializedIds.includes(id));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.includes()
String.includes()

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

ⓘ Get performance results from real users on your website with Request Metrics.

Website Performance Monitoring by Request Metrics

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/108.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 108 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.includes()	207559.7 Ops/sec
String.includes()	2331.7 Ops/sec

includes() in an array vs includes() in a string 2 (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Array.includes() vs String.includes()

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Array.includes()

String.includes()

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A