Benchmark: perfomance.now vs Date.now vs new Date().getTime() and toString(36) 1

Script Preparation code:

var timestamp = null;

Tests:

performance.now().toString(36)
timestamp = performance.now().toString(36);
Date.now().toString(36)
timestamp = Date.now().toString(36);
new Date().getTime().toString(36);
timestamp = new Date().getTime().toString(36);
new Date().toString(36)
timastamp = new Date().toString(36)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
performance.now().toString(36)
Date.now().toString(36)
new Date().getTime().toString(36);
new Date().toString(36)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**What is being tested on MeasureThat.net?**

MeasureThat.net is running microbenchmarks to compare the performance of three different methods for measuring time in JavaScript:

1. `performance.now()`: This method returns the number of milliseconds since `performance.now()` was called, without rounding or truncating.
2. `Date.now()`: This method returns the number of milliseconds since January 1, 1970, 00:00:00 UTC, which is often used as an approximation for current time in JavaScript.
3. `new Date().getTime()`: This method returns the number of milliseconds since January 1, 1970, 00:00:00 UTC, similar to `Date.now()`.

Each of these methods will be converted to a base-36 string (also known as "base36 encoding" or "hexadecimal") using the `toString(36)` method.

**Options compared**

The three options being compared are:

* `performance.now()`
* `Date.now()`
* `new Date().getTime()`

Each option has its own pros and cons:

* **`performance.now()`**: This method is generally considered the most accurate way to measure time in JavaScript, as it uses high-resolution timing counters that are not subject to rounding or truncation. However, this method may not be supported by older browsers.
* **`Date.now()`**: This method is widely supported across different browsers and versions of JavaScript, but it may introduce small errors due to the way the browser calculates the current time. Additionally, `Date.now()` uses a different timing source than `performance.now()`, which can affect accuracy.
* **`new Date().getTime()`**: This method has the same limitations as `Date.now()` in terms of accuracy and compatibility across browsers.

**Other considerations**

When using these methods to measure time, it's essential to consider the following:

* Always use a consistent unit for your measurements (e.g., milliseconds) to ensure accurate comparisons.
* Be aware that these methods may be affected by factors like system clock adjustments or browser-specific optimizations.

**Libraries used**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, `performance.now()` and `Date.now()` are built-in JavaScript functions, while `new Date().getTime()` uses a standard JavaScript method for working with dates.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

None of the methods being compared rely on special JavaScript features or syntax that is not widely supported (e.g., ES6 modules, async/await).

**Alternatives**

If you need to measure time in JavaScript and want alternatives to these methods:

* **`Date.now()`**: Use this method if you need to support older browsers or want a simple way to get an estimate of the current time.
* **`performance.now()`**: Prefer this method when accuracy is crucial, such as in performance profiling or high-frequency measurements. However, be aware that it may not work in older browsers.
* **`setInterval()` and `clearInterval()`**: You can use these methods to create a loop with a fixed interval between executions, which can help you measure time intervals.

Keep in mind that each of these alternatives has its own trade-offs and limitations.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/17.0 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 17 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
performance.now().toString(36)	5108764.5 Ops/sec
Date.now().toString(36)	5429021.5 Ops/sec
new Date().getTime().toString(36);	5110398.0 Ops/sec
new Date().toString(36)	2612108.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

perfomance.now vs Date.now vs new Date().getTime() and toString(36) 1 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of perfomance.now, Date.now and new Date().getTime() and converting to b36 string

Comparing performance of: performance.now().toString(36) vs Date.now().toString(36) vs new Date().getTime().toString(36); vs new Date().toString(36)

Created: 9 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

performance.now().toString(36)

Date.now().toString(36)

new Date().getTime().toString(36);

new Date().toString(36)

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):