Benchmark: Find min number - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var arr = Array(1000).fill('').map(() => Math.floor(Math.random(0, 1) *100))

Tests:

Math
Math.min(...arr)
Reduce
arr.reduce((a, c) => a < c ? a : c)
For
let min = arr[0]; for (let i = 1; i < arr.length; i++) { if (arr[i] < min) min = arr[i]; }
ForEach
let min = arr[0]; arr.forEach((curr) => { if (curr < min) min = curr; });
For in
let min = arr[0]; for (const curr in arr) { if (curr < min) min = curr; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Math
Reduce
For
ForEach
For in

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/116.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/116.0.1938.76

Browser/OS: Chrome 116 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Math	637644.1 Ops/sec
Reduce	1440328.6 Ops/sec
For	15473.3 Ops/sec
ForEach	1295022.8 Ops/sec
For in	72365.2 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 benchmark and its components.

**Benchmark Definition**

The test aims to find the minimum number in an array of 1000 random integers. The conclusion is that for small arrays (less than 200), using `Math.min` is faster, while for large datasets, a "For loop" approach is more efficient.

**Script Preparation Code**

```javascript
var arr = Array(1000).fill('').map(() => Math.floor(Math.random(0, 1) *100));
```

This code generates an array of 1000 random integers between 0 and 99 (inclusive).

**HTML Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means the benchmark only focuses on JavaScript performance.

**Test Cases**

The test compares four different approaches to find the minimum number in the array:

1. **Math.min**: Uses the built-in `min` function from the Math library.
2. **Reduce**: Uses the `reduce` method to iterate over the array and find the minimum value.
3. **For loop**: Uses a traditional for loop to iterate over the array and update the minimum value.
4. **ForEach**: Uses the `forEach` method to iterate over the array, but with a twist: uses the `in` operator to access the array elements.
5. **For in**: This option is almost identical to the For loop approach, except it uses the `in` operator instead of indexing.

**Libraries and Special JS Features**

* The `Math.min` function uses the Math library, which provides mathematical functions for common operations like min, max, sin, cos, etc.
* The `reduce` method is a built-in array method in JavaScript that reduces an array to a single value. It's not specific to any library.
* The `forEach` method is also a built-in array method that executes a callback function once for each element in the array.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Math.min**:
	* Pros: Fast, concise, and easy to read.
	* Cons: Only works on arrays with at least one element, and it doesn't work with non-numeric values.
2. **Reduce**:
	* Pros: General-purpose method that can handle any array and any comparison function.
	* Cons: Can be slower than `Math.min` for small arrays due to the overhead of the reduction process.
3. **For loop**:
	* Pros: Slow, but still works on all arrays, regardless of size or contents.
	* Cons: Verbosity can lead to slower performance compared to optimized methods like `Math.min`.
4. **ForEach**:
	* Pros: Fast and concise, with the added benefit of directly accessing array elements using `in`.
	* Cons: Can be less readable than traditional for loops or other methods.
5. **For in**:
	* Pros: Similar performance to For loop and ForEach, but with a unique twist that might simplify certain use cases.
	* Cons: Still not as concise or readable as some other options.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches could include:

1. **Sorted array**: If the array is already sorted, finding the minimum value can be as simple as returning the first element.
2. **Heap data structure**: For larger datasets, using a heap data structure like a priority queue can provide an efficient way to find the minimum value.
3. **Native methods for specific types**: Depending on the type of numbers in the array (e.g., integers, floats), specialized native methods might be available, such as `Number.min` or `Float64Array.min`.

Please note that this analysis is based on general JavaScript principles and performance characteristics. The best approach will depend on the specific use case and requirements of your project.

Related benchmarks:

Find min number (version: 0)

Conclusion: If your array length is small (less than 200) use Math, otherwise for large dataset "For loop" is faster.

Comparing performance of: Math vs Reduce vs For vs ForEach vs For in

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Math

Reduce

For

ForEach

For in

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):