Benchmark: Check speed between filter and findIndex /Slice when removing one item from an array

Script Preparation code:

var testArray = [{name: 1}, {name: 2}, {name: 3}, {name: 4}, {name:5}, {name:6}, {name:7}, {name:8}, {name:9}, {name:10}]

Tests:

Array.filter
var result = testArray.filter(item => item.name !== 4)
Array.findIndex
var index = testArray.findIndex(item => item.name === 4) var result = testArray.slice(index, 1)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.filter
Array.findIndex

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/114.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 114 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.filter	17877182.0 Ops/sec
Array.findIndex	13060808.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided benchmark measures the performance difference between two JavaScript methods: `filter()` and `findIndex()` with subsequent use of `slice()`. The test creates an array of objects, filters out one item using both methods, and then slices the resulting array.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **`Array.filter()`**: This method returns a new array containing all elements that pass the test implemented by the provided function.
2. **`Array.findIndex()` + `slice()`**: This approach first finds the index of the element to be filtered out using `findIndex()`, and then uses `slice()` to create a new array containing only one element.

**Pros and Cons**

* **`Array.filter()`**:
	+ Pros: Simple, efficient, and widely supported.
	+ Cons: Creates a new array, which can lead to memory issues for large datasets.
* **`Array.findIndex()` + `slice()`**:
	+ Pros: Can be more memory-efficient if only one element is needed.
	+ Cons: Requires two steps (finding the index and slicing), which may introduce additional overhead.

**Library Usage**

None of the provided options use a library, but the original script preparation code uses an array literal to create the test data:
```javascript
var testArray = [{name: 1}, {name: 2}, {name: 3}, {name:4},{name:5},{name:6},{name:7},{name:8},{name:9},{name:10}]
```
**Special JS Features/Syntax**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in this benchmark.

**Other Considerations**

* **Memory Usage**: The `Array.filter()` method creates a new array, which can lead to increased memory usage for large datasets. In contrast, the `Array.findIndex()` + `slice()` approach may be more memory-efficient if only one element is needed.
* **Readability and Maintainability**: The `Array.findIndex()` + `slice()` approach may be less readable and maintainable due to its complexity and multiple steps.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other approaches could include:

1. Using a different data structure, such as an object with a single property containing the filtered value.
2. Implementing a custom filtering algorithm using bitwise operations or other optimization techniques.
3. Comparing performance on different platforms, browsers, or Node.js versions.
4. Adding additional features, such as sorting, mapping, or reducing, to the test case.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would require significant changes to the benchmark and may not be relevant depending on the specific use case.

Related benchmarks:

Check speed between filter and findIndex /Slice when removing one item from an array (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array.filter vs Array.findIndex

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.filter

Array.findIndex

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):