Benchmark: rgb vs rgba vs hex canvas

HTML Preparation code:

<canvas id="canvasOne" width="400" height="400"></canvas>
<canvas id="canvasTwo" width="400" height="400"></canvas>
<canvas id="canvasThr" width="400" height="400"></canvas>

Script Preparation code:

var canvasOne = document.getElementById("canvasOne");
var ctxOne = canvasOne.getContext("2d");

var canvasTwo = document.getElementById("canvasTwo");
var ctxTwo = canvasTwo.getContext("2d");

var canvasThr = document.getElementById("canvasThr");
var ctxThr = canvasThr.getContext("2d");

Tests:

alpha
ctxOne.beginPath(); ctxOne.fillStyle = 'rgba(231, 76, 60, 0.1)'; ctxTwo.arc(200, 200, 100, 0, Math.PI * 2, true); ctxOne.fill();
no alpha
ctxTwo.beginPath(); ctxTwo.fillStyle = 'rgb(249, 206, 201)'; ctxTwo.arc(200, 200, 100, 0, Math.PI * 2, true); ctxTwo.fill();
hex
ctxTwo.beginPath(); ctxTwo.fillStyle = '#f9cec9'; ctxTwo.arc(200, 200, 100, 0, Math.PI * 2, true); ctxTwo.fill();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
alpha
no alpha
hex

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 20 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:132.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/132.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 132 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
alpha	2964071.2 Ops/sec
no alpha	168369.3 Ops/sec
hex	164636.9 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided JSON data and explain what's being tested, compared, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The `Name` field indicates that this benchmark compares the performance of different color representations (RGB, RGBA, and hexadecimal) when drawing shapes on a 2D canvas.

**Options Compared**

1. **RGBA**: Represents colors with alpha transparency (opacity). It consists of four values: red, green, blue, and alpha (transparency).
2. **RGB**: Represents colors without alpha transparency. It consists of three values: red, green, and blue.
3. **Hexadecimal**: A shorthand way to represent colors using a hex code (e.g., `#f9cec9`).

**Pros and Cons**

1. **RGBA**:
	* Pros: Provides better control over opacity and is widely supported.
	* Cons: Requires more bytes to store compared to RGB.
2. **RGB**:
	* Pros: Smaller byte size, faster rendering.
	* Cons: No alpha transparency, can lead to artifacts if used with semi-transparent backgrounds.
3. **Hexadecimal**:
	* Pros: Shorter and easier to read than RGBA or RGB values.
	* Cons: Less intuitive for developers familiar with RGBA/RGB color models.

**Library and Purpose**

None explicitly mentioned in the provided code. However, it's likely that the `Canvas` API is being used, which is a built-in JavaScript library for rendering 2D graphics in web browsers.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None explicitly mentioned in the provided code.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark creates three canvases (`canvasOne`, `canvasTwo`, and `canvasThr`) to test the color representations. Each canvas has its own context (`ctxOne`, `ctxTwo`, and `ctxThr`).
* The `fillStyle` property is used to set the fill color for each shape drawn on the canvas.
* The shapes are drawn using a circle ( `arc()` method) with a radius of 100 pixels, centered at (200, 200).

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for testing color representations and rendering performance could include:

1. Using different image formats (e.g., PNG, JPEG) instead of canvases.
2. Drawing shapes with different geometries (e.g., polygons, lines).
3. Adding more complex graphics or animations to the benchmark.
4. Testing on different devices or browsers.

Please note that these alternatives might not be directly related to color representations and would require modifications to the benchmark code.

Related benchmarks:

rgb vs rgba vs hex canvas (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: alpha vs no alpha vs hex

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

alpha

no alpha

hex

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):