Benchmark: Floor test - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var floatNumber = 12.1234567;

Tests:

Math.floor
Math.floor(floatNumber)
~~ Floor
~~floatNumber

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Math.floor
~~ Floor

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 provided benchmarking framework and test cases.

**What is tested on the provided JSON?**

The provided JSON represents two microbenchmarks: `Floor test`. The `Floor test` measures the performance of two different approaches to round down a floating-point number:

1. **Math.floor**: This is a built-in JavaScript function that returns the largest integer less than or equal to the input value.
2. **~~floatNumber**: This is a bitwise NOT operator (~) applied to the `floatNumber`. In JavaScript, the bitwise NOT operator performs a binary inversion of its operand.

**Options compared**

The two options being compared are:

* Math.floor: a built-in function that uses arithmetic operations to round down the input value.
* ~~floatNumber: a bitwise operation that inverts the bits of the float number and then converts it back to an integer, which effectively rounds down to the nearest whole number.

**Pros and cons**

* **Math.floor**:
	+ Pros: Fast, well-optimized, and widely supported by most JavaScript engines.
	+ Cons: May be slower for very large or very small input values due to the overhead of calling a function.
* ~~floatNumber:
	+ Pros: Inexpensive operation that doesn't require function calls, making it suitable for performance-critical code paths.
	+ Cons: May not work correctly for negative numbers (it will return -1), and its behavior is not well-defined for edge cases.

**Library**

There are no libraries used in this benchmarking framework.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

None mentioned in the provided JSON.

**Other alternatives**

If you wanted to add more options to the benchmark, some alternative approaches could be:

* Using a decimal arithmetic library like Decimal.js or Big.js
* Employing a custom rounding algorithm using integer division or multiplication
* Utilizing SIMD instructions (e.g., SSE/AVX) for parallelization

Keep in mind that these alternatives might introduce additional complexity and may not always yield better performance results.

**Benchmark preparation code**

The provided JSON contains two scripts:

1. `var floatNumber = 12.1234567;` sets up a floating-point number value.
2. The `Html Preparation Code` is empty, which means no HTML-related setup is required for this benchmark.

Individual test cases are defined in the array, with each object containing:

* `Benchmark Definition`: The expression to be evaluated (e.g., `Math.floor(floatNumber)`).
* `Test Name`: A descriptive name for the test case.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/114.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 114 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Math.floor	2286741.8 Ops/sec
~~ Floor	7292494.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Floor test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Math.floor vs ~~ Floor

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Math.floor

~~ Floor

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):