Benchmark: bigint prime * - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

int
104723 * 104729
bigint
104723n * 104723n

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
int
bigint

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; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/116.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 116 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
int	703253312.0 Ops/sec
bigint	702770176.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark data to understand what's being tested.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark measures the performance of JavaScript integers (int) and BigInt numbers in arithmetic operations, specifically multiplication. There are two test cases:

1. `int`: Tests the performance of regular JavaScript integers.
2. `bigint`: Tests the performance of BigInt numbers.

**Options compared:**

In this case, there's only one option being compared for each test case: the use of `n` suffix with the number (e.g., `104723n`) to indicate a BigInt value.

Pros and cons of using `n` suffix:

Pros:

* The `n` suffix is a standard way to denote BigInt numbers in JavaScript.
* It's widely supported across most browsers and environments.

Cons:

* Some older browsers or environments might not support the `n` suffix, which could lead to performance differences or errors.
* Using `BigInt` objects directly (e.g., `BigInt(104723)` instead of `104723n`) can provide more control over the underlying implementation, but this is not being tested here.

**Library and syntax:**

There's no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, BigInt numbers are a built-in feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). If you're using an older version of JavaScript that doesn't support BigInts, you might need to use a polyfill or alternative implementation.

No special JS features or syntax are being tested in this benchmark.

**Alternatives:**

If you want to write your own benchmarks or similar tests, here are some alternatives:

1. Use a benchmarking library like Benchmark.js or Microbenchmark.js.
2. Utilize the built-in `performance.now()` and `performance.timeEnd()` functions for measuring performance.
3. Write custom benchmarking scripts using Node.js's built-in timing functions (e.g., `process.hrtime()`) or other tools like Google's perf tool.

For a more comprehensive understanding of JavaScript performance, you can also explore:

* WebAssembly (WASM) for improved performance in web applications.
* Just-In-Time (JIT) compilers like V8 (used by Chrome) or SpiderMonkey (used by Firefox).
* Browser-specific optimization techniques and features, such as Web Workers, async/await, and Promises.

Related benchmarks:

bigint prime * (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: int vs bigint

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

int

bigint

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):