Benchmark: soa vs aos - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var N = 10000;
var x = new Float32Array(N);
var y = new Float32Array(N);
var z = new Float32Array(N);

var vectors = [];
for(var i = 0; i < N; i++){
  x[i] = Math.random();
  y[i] = Math.random();
  z[i] = Math.random();
  
  vectors[i] = { x: Math.random(), y: Math.random(), z: Math.random() };
}
var vector;

Tests:

soa
for (var i = 0, li=x.length; i < li; ++i) { x[i] = 2 * x[i]; y[i] = 2 * y[i]; z[i] = 2 * z[i]; }
aos
for (var i = 0, li=vectors.length; i < li; ++i) { vector = vectors[i]; vector.x = 2 * vector.x; vector.y = 2 * vector.y; vector.z = 2 * vector.z; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
soa
aos

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and its test cases.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches for modifying arrays in JavaScript:

1. **Statically Optimized Arrays (SOA)**: This approach uses static typing to optimize array access. The `x`, `y`, and `z` variables are typed as `Float32Array`, which allows the browser to perform more efficient operations on the arrays.
2. **Arrays of Objects (AOA)**: This approach creates objects with `vector` properties, where each object represents a vector in 3D space.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of the two approaches:

* SOA: `for (var i = 0, li=x.length; i < li; ++i) { x[i] = 2 * x[i]; y[i] = 2 * y[i]; z[i] = 2 * z[i]; }`
* AOA: `for (var i = 0, li=vectors.length; i < li; ++i) { vector = vectors[i]; vector.x = 2 * vector.x; vector.y = 2 * vector.y; vector.z = 2 * vector.z; }`

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **SOA**: Pros:
	+ More efficient array access due to static typing.
	+ Less memory allocation overhead, as arrays are pre-allocated.
* Cons:
	+ Requires explicit type annotations, which can be error-prone.
	+ May not work well with dynamic data structures or complex logic.
* **AOA**: Pros:
	+ Allows for more flexibility in data structure and logic.
	+ Can be easier to implement complex logic using objects.
* Cons:
	+ More memory allocation overhead due to object creation.
	+ Slower array access due to property lookup.

**Library and Syntax Considerations**

There are no libraries or special JavaScript features explicitly used in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that the use of `Float32Array` is a part of the Web API, which provides efficient storage and manipulation of 32-bit floating-point numbers.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other approaches to modify arrays could include:

* **Iterators**: Using iterators to iterate over arrays can be more memory-efficient than accessing individual elements.
* **Map**: Applying a transformation function using `Array.prototype.map()` or `forEach()` can simplify array modifications while maintaining performance.
* **Native Array Methods**: Utilizing native array methods like `map()`, `filter()`, and `reduce()` can provide optimized performance for common operations.

These alternatives might not be as performant as SOA, but they offer different trade-offs in terms of readability, maintainability, and flexibility.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/122.0.0.0 YaBrowser/24.4.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Yandex Browser 24 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
soa	413.0 Ops/sec
aos	315.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

soa vs aos (version: 3)

As titled

Comparing performance of: soa vs aos

Created: 8 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

soa

aos

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):