Benchmark: Map vs Object vs Array @adelinolsn v1.1

Script Preparation code:

var quantityOfElements = 1000000;
var array = new Array(quantityOfElements);
var quantityOfTests = 10000;

for (let i = 0; i < quantityOfElements; i++) {
    array[i] = {
        id: i
    };
}

var map = new Map();

for (let i = 0; i < quantityOfElements; i++) {
    map.set(array[i].id, array[i]);
}

var obj = {};

for (let i = 0; i < quantityOfElements; i++) {
    obj[array[i].id] = array[i];
}

Tests:

Map.get
for (let i = 0; i < quantityOfTests; i++) { const random = Math.floor(Math.random() * (quantityOfElements - 1)); map.get(random); }
Object
for (let i = 0; i < quantityOfTests; i++) { const random = Math.floor(Math.random() * (quantityOfElements - 1)); obj[random]; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Map.get
Object

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**

The test is comparing the performance of three data structures: an object (`obj`), a Map (`map`), and an array (`array`). The benchmark definition creates a large dataset by generating 1 million objects with unique IDs, and then sets up three data structures:

*   `map`: A new instance of the Map data structure. It iterates over the dataset and adds each object to the map using its ID as the key.
*   `obj`: An empty object that will be used to store references to the dataset objects.
*   `array`: The original array created from the dataset.

**Comparison Options**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches:

1.  **Map.get**: Iterates over the map and retrieves a random element (using the ID as the key) for a specified number of tests (10,000).
2.  **Object**: Iterates over the object and accesses a random property (using the ID as the property name) for a specified number of tests (10,000).

**Pros and Cons**

*   **Map.get**:
    *   Pros: Maps are optimized for fast lookups using their key-value pairs. In this case, it provides direct access to any element in the map.
    *   Cons: It may incur additional overhead due to the Map's implementation details (e.g., hash table resizing).
*   **Object**:
    *   Pros: Objects provide a simple and intuitive way to store and retrieve data using property names. This approach is closer to how we typically access objects in JavaScript.
    *   Cons: Object lookups are slower compared to the Map's direct lookup mechanism.

**Library/Functionality**

In this benchmark, the `Map` class is being used as a built-in JavaScript data structure. The purpose of the Map is to provide fast and efficient key-value pairs for storing and retrieving data.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes mentioned in the provided code snippet that would require additional explanation beyond the standard JavaScript basics.

Now, let's consider alternative approaches:

*   **Array**: While arrays can be used to store collections of data, their lookups using an index (like `array[random]`) are generally slower than Map.get and Object accesses due to linear search algorithms.
*   **Set**: If the dataset contained unique values only, a Set could provide faster lookups compared to Objects since Sets use hash tables internally. However, in this benchmark, we're dealing with objects as keys, so it's not applicable.
*   **Other Libraries/Implementations**: Depending on the specific requirements and constraints of the project, other data structures like trie-based dictionaries or custom array implementations might be more suitable than the built-in JavaScript Map.

By choosing between these approaches, developers can select the most efficient way to store, retrieve, and manipulate their data, depending on their specific use cases.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/126.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 126 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Map.get	318.3 Ops/sec
Object	317.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Map vs Object vs Array @adelinolsn v1.1 (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Map.get vs Object

Created: 4 months ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Map.get

Object

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):