Benchmark: Filter vs Find with FOr

Script Preparation code:

var arrOriginal = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]
var response = [];

Tests:

find with for
for(const key in arrOriginal) { if ((key % 2) === 0) { response.push(key) } }
select with filter
arrOriginal.filter(number => number % 2 === 0)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
find with for
select with filter

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: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 9; SAMSUNG SM-G960F) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) SamsungBrowser/11.1 Chrome/75.0.3770.143 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile 75 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
find with for	314368.8 Ops/sec
select with filter	3397707.0 Ops/sec

Filter vs Find with FOr (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: find with for vs select with filter

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

find with for

select with filter

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A