Benchmark: Comb Sort vs. Native Sort

Script Preparation code:

var sampleData = [];
for (var i=0; i < 100; i++){ 
  sampleData.push({value: (Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000))});
}

var selectorFn = function(x) { 
  return x.value;  
}

var combSort = function (source, selectorFn, sortDirection) {
    var result = source.slice();
    var count = result.length;
    var gap = count;
    var swapped = true;

    while (gap > 1 || swapped) {

      if (gap > 1) {
        gap = Math.floor(gap / 1.24733);
      }

      var i = 0;
      swapped = false;

      while ((i + gap) < count) {

        var item1 = result[i];
        var item2 = result[i + gap];

        if (shouldBeSwaped(selectorFn(item1), selectorFn(item2), selectorFn, sortDirection)) {
          result[i] = item2;
          result[i + gap] = item1;
          swapped = true;
        }

        i++;
      }
	}
  
    return result;
}

 var shouldBeSwaped = function(value, valueToCompare, selectorFn, sortDirection) {
    let less = value > valueToCompare;

    return sortDirection === "asc" ? less : !less;
  }

Tests:

Native Sort DESC
var order = "desc"; sampleData.sort(function(a,b){ var x = selectorFn(a); var y = selectorFn(b); var res = ((x < y) ? -1 : ((x > y) ? 1 : 0)); return order === "desc" ? -1*res : res; })
Native Sort ASC
var order = "asc"; sampleData.sort(function(a,b){ var x = selectorFn(a); var y = selectorFn(b); var res = ((x < y) ? -1 : ((x > y) ? 1 : 0)); return order === "desc" ? -1*res : res; })
Comb Sort DESC
var order = "asc"; combSort(sampleData, selectorFn, order);
Comb Sort ASC
var order = "asc"; combSort(sampleData, selectorFn, order);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Native Sort DESC
Native Sort ASC
Comb Sort DESC
Comb Sort ASC

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

ⓘ Get performance results from real users on your website with Request Metrics.

Website Performance Monitoring by Request Metrics

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/52.0.2743.116 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 52 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Native Sort DESC	4445.7 Ops/sec
Native Sort ASC	3932.7 Ops/sec
Comb Sort DESC	5221.1 Ops/sec
Comb Sort ASC	5122.5 Ops/sec

Comb Sort vs. Native Sort (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Native Sort DESC vs Native Sort ASC vs Comb Sort DESC vs Comb Sort ASC

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Native Sort DESC

Native Sort ASC

Comb Sort DESC

Comb Sort ASC

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A