Benchmark: map vs obj test4

Script Preparation code:

var map = new Map();
var obj = {};

var value = {
    toto: 'name',
    toto: {
        toto: 'name',
        toto: {
            toto: 'name',
        },
    },
    toto: {
        toto: 'name',
        toto: {
            toto: 'name',
        },
    },
    toto: {
        toto: 'name',
        toto: {
            toto: 'name',
        },
    },
}

for (i = 0; i < 2000; i++) {
    map.set(i, value);
    obj[i] = value
}

Tests:

map
map.get(991)
obj
obj[991]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
map
obj

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/117.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 117 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
map	742476032.0 Ops/sec
obj	742056704.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark definition and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON defines two individual test cases:

1. `map.get(991)` ( Test Name: "map" )
2. `obj[991]` ( Test Name: "obj" )

These tests are designed to measure the performance of accessing elements in a `Map` data structure versus an object.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is identical for both test cases:

```javascript
var map = new Map();
var obj = {};

var value = {
    toto: 'name',
    toto: { 
        toto: 'name', 
        toto: { 
            toto: 'name', 
        }, 
    }, 
    toto: { 
        toto: 'name', 
        toto: { 
            toto: 'name', 
        }, 
    }, 
    toto: { 
        toto: 'name', 
        toto: { 
            toto: 'name', 
        }, 
    }, 
};
```

This code creates a `Map` called `map`, an object called `obj`, and a nested object `value`. The nested object is populated with multiple levels of nesting, which will be accessed in the tests.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided for this benchmark.

**Comparison**

The two test cases compare the performance of accessing elements in a `Map` data structure (`map.get(991)`) versus an object (`obj[991]`). The execution speed and number of executions per second are measured for both tests.

**Pros and Cons**

**`map.get(991)` (Test Name: "map")**

Pros:

* Fast lookups due to the use of a hash table
* Efficient access to nested elements in the `value` object

Cons:

* May have higher overhead due to the creation of a new Map instance and the associated memory allocation

**`obj[991]` (Test Name: "obj")**

Pros:

* May be faster due to the use of an existing object instance
* Less overhead compared to creating a new Map instance

Cons:

* May be slower due to the need to traverse the nested object structure
* Less efficient access to elements in deep nesting

**Library and Purpose**

The `Map` data structure is built into modern JavaScript engines, including Firefox. It provides a fast and efficient way to store key-value pairs.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special features or syntax used in this benchmark that would require specific knowledge of JavaScript. The focus is on comparing the performance of accessing elements in a `Map` versus an object.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for storing and retrieving data include:

* Arrays: While not as efficient as Maps, arrays can be used to store key-value pairs.
* Objects with property names: Similar to using objects, but with the added complexity of having multiple property names.
* JSON files or other external storage: For larger datasets or more complex data structures.

Keep in mind that the choice of data structure depends on the specific use case and performance requirements.

Related benchmarks:

map vs obj test4 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: map vs obj

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

map

obj

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):