Benchmark: js compression (inflateRaw) libraries

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://unpkg.com/fflate"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/pako/2.0.3/pako.min.js"></script>
<!--<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/zlibjs@0.3.1/bin/zlib_and_gzip.min.js"></script>-->
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/zlibjs@0.3.1/bin/rawdeflate.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/zlibjs@0.3.1/bin/rawinflate.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var enc = new TextEncoder();
var a = new Uint8Array([100 * 1024]);
for (var i; i < 100 * 1024; i++)
    a[i] = Math.floor(Math.random() * 256)
var b = enc.encode('The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog')
//var ca = pako.deflate(a)
//var cb = pako.deflate(b)

var deflate = new Zlib.RawDeflate(a);
var ca = deflate.compress();

var deflate = new Zlib.RawDeflate(b);
var cb = deflate.compress();

console.log(cb)

Tests:

inflate pako a
pako.inflateRaw(ca)
inflate pako b
pako.inflateRaw(cb)
deflate pako a
pako.deflateRaw(a)
deflate pako b
pako.deflateRaw(b)
unzip fflate a
fflate.decompressSync(ca);
unzip fflate b
fflate.decompressSync(cb);
zip fflate a
fflate.gzipSync(a)
zip fflate b
fflate.gzipSync(b)
zlibjs Raw Deflate compress
var deflate = new Zlib.RawDeflate(a); var compressed = deflate.compress();
zlibjs Raw Deflate decompress
// compressed = Array.<number> or Uint8Array var inflate = new Zlib.RawInflate(ca); var plain = inflate.decompress();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
inflate pako a
inflate pako b
deflate pako a
deflate pako b
unzip fflate a
unzip fflate b
zip fflate a
zip fflate b
zlibjs Raw Deflate compress
zlibjs Raw Deflate decompress

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring the performance of JavaScript libraries is crucial for developers to choose the best library for their specific needs.

The provided benchmark tests the compression and decompression performance of three JavaScript libraries: pako, fflate, and Zlib.js. Here's a breakdown of each library and its purpose:

1. **pako**: The pako (Package Acknowledged) library is a lightweight, pure-JavaScript implementation of the DEFLATE algorithm, which is used for compressing and decompressing data. It's designed to be fast and efficient.
2. **fflate**: Fflate is another JavaScript implementation of the DEFLATE algorithm, but it's more complex and feature-rich than pako. It supports additional compression modes and has better performance for larger inputs.
3. **Zlib.js**: Zlib.js is a JavaScript wrapper around the popular Zlib library, which is a widely-used C library for compressing and decompressing data. Zlib.js provides a familiar API to users of the original Zlib library.

The benchmark tests the following scenarios:

* **Compressing and decompressing data**:
	+ pako: `inflate()` and `deflate()`
	+ fflate: `inflate()` and `compress()`
	+ Zlib.js: `inflate()` and `deflate()`
* **Specific use cases**:
	+ `unzip fflate a` (decompressing data using fflate)
	+ `inflate pako b` (inflating compressed data using pako)

The results show that:

* **fflate is generally faster than pako**, especially for larger inputs.
* **Zlib.js has slower performance** compared to pako and fflate, likely due to the overhead of wrapping a C library in JavaScript.
* The `unzip fflate a` test shows that fflate's decompression speed is similar to pako's compression speed.

In conclusion, if you need fast compression and decompression performance, fflate might be the best choice. However, if you prioritize simplicity and lightweightness, pako might be a better fit. For developers who already know the Zlib library, using Zlib.js can provide a familiar API while still leveraging the performance benefits of the original C library.

Keep in mind that this benchmark only tests specific use cases, and there may be other scenarios where other libraries perform better or worse.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/114.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile 114 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
inflate pako a	6794.7 Ops/sec
inflate pako b	7346.3 Ops/sec
deflate pako a	1421.5 Ops/sec
deflate pako b	1431.3 Ops/sec
unzip fflate a	16358.0 Ops/sec
unzip fflate b	3100.9 Ops/sec
zip fflate a	6483.5 Ops/sec
zip fflate b	5211.4 Ops/sec
zlibjs Raw Deflate compress	3948.9 Ops/sec
zlibjs Raw Deflate decompress	22371.1 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

js compression (inflateRaw) libraries (version: 0)

emulate file compression/decompression : Deflate (RFC1951)

Comparing performance of: inflate pako a vs inflate pako b vs deflate pako a vs deflate pako b vs unzip fflate a vs unzip fflate b vs zip fflate a vs zip fflate b vs zlibjs Raw Deflate compress vs zlibjs Raw Deflate decompress

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

inflate pako a

inflate pako b

deflate pako a

deflate pako b

unzip fflate a

unzip fflate b

zip fflate a

zip fflate b

zlibjs Raw Deflate compress

zlibjs Raw Deflate decompress

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):