Benchmark: Summing with EcmaScript6 Int16Array vs regular JS array

Script Preparation code:

var int16 = new Int16Array(100);
var regular = [];

for(var i=0;i<100;i++){
  int16[i] = i;
  regular.push(i);
}

var add_arrow_fn = (a, b) => a + b
function add_plain_fn(a, b) { return a + b }

Tests:

Int16Array: for..of
let sum = 0 for (const value of int16) { sum = sum + value }
Plain JS array: for..of
let sum = 0 for (const value of regular) { sum = sum + value }
Int16Array: for index
let sum = 0; for (let i = 0; i < 100; i++) { sum = sum + int16[i]; }
Plain JS array: for index
let sum = 0; for (let i = 0; i < 100; i++) { sum = sum + regular[i]; }
Int16Array: Array reduce: Arrow Function
let sum = int16.reduce(add_arrow_fn, 0)
Plain JS array: Array reduce: Arrow Function
let sum = int16.reduce(add_arrow_fn, 0)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Int16Array: for..of
Plain JS array: for..of
Int16Array: for index
Plain JS array: for index
Int16Array: Array reduce: Arrow Function
Plain JS array: Array reduce: Arrow Function

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark compares different ways to sum up values in two types of arrays: `Int16Array` and regular JavaScript arrays (`[]`). The test cases cover both for loops and array reduction methods (reduce).

**Options Compared**

1. **For loop with for-of iteration**: This method iterates over the array elements using the for-of loop, which is a modern JavaScript feature.
	* Pros: Easy to read, allows for concise code, and is relatively fast.
	* Cons: Can be slower than other methods due to overhead of the for-of loop.
2. **For loop with traditional indexing**: This method iterates over the array elements using traditional indexing (array indices).
	* Pros: Generally faster than for-of iteration due to reduced overhead.
	* Cons: Can lead to more verbose code and potential errors if not used carefully.
3. **Array reduction with arrow function**: This method uses the `reduce()` method to sum up all values in the array, passing an arrow function as the callback.
	* Pros: Concise, efficient, and often faster than traditional loops.
	* Cons: May be less readable for some developers who are not familiar with arrow functions.

**Library and Purpose**

The `Int16Array` is a typed array data structure provided by the Web API. It's designed to hold 16-bit signed integers and offers performance benefits over regular JavaScript arrays when working with large datasets.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The for-of loop is a modern JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). It allows iterating over array elements without explicitly using indices.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark is run on Windows 10, desktop, and uses the Opera 102 browser. This might affect results due to differences between browsers or operating systems.
* The test cases are designed to compare performance across different methods rather than focusing on readability or maintainability.
* It's worth noting that `Int16Array` provides a significant performance advantage over regular JavaScript arrays when working with large datasets of integers.

**Alternatives**

If you're not interested in using for-of loops, traditional indexing can be used instead. However, this approach may lead to more verbose code and potential errors if not handled carefully.

Other alternatives could include:

* Using `Array.prototype.forEach()` or other array methods that might offer performance benefits
* Optimizing the loop structure (e.g., unrolling loops)
* Using specialized libraries or frameworks for array manipulation

Keep in mind that these alternatives may require more development effort and might not provide significant performance gains.

If you have any further questions or would like me to clarify any points, feel free to ask!

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/116.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 OPR/102.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Opera 102 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Int16Array: for..of	3490139.2 Ops/sec
Plain JS array: for..of	11216050.0 Ops/sec
Int16Array: for index	272903.0 Ops/sec
Plain JS array: for index	272229.9 Ops/sec
Int16Array: Array reduce: Arrow Function	1861762.2 Ops/sec
Plain JS array: Array reduce: Arrow Function	1865037.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Summing with EcmaScript6 Int16Array vs regular JS array (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Int16Array: for..of vs Plain JS array: for..of vs Int16Array: for index vs Plain JS array: for index vs Int16Array: Array reduce: Arrow Function vs Plain JS array: Array reduce: Arrow Function

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Int16Array: for..of

Plain JS array: for..of

Int16Array: for index

Plain JS array: for index

Int16Array: Array reduce: Arrow Function

Plain JS array: Array reduce: Arrow Function

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):