Benchmark: Array.concat vs Array.prototype.concat.apply

Array.concat vs Array.prototype.concat.apply (version: 0)

Compare direct concat call with apply for multiple arrays concatenation

Comparing performance of: Array.concat vs Array.prototype.concat.apply vs Array.prototype.concat.apply short form vs Array.prototype.concat.apply short form without new empty array instance in apply vs Array.prototype.concat.apply short form without new empty array at all

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Script Preparation code:

var array1 = Array(400).fill().map(() => Math.round(Math.random() * 40));
var array2 = Array(400).fill().map(() => Math.round(Math.random() * 40));
var array3 = Array(400).fill().map(() => Math.round(Math.random() * 40));
var array4 = Array(400).fill().map(() => Math.round(Math.random() * 40));
var array5 = Array(400).fill().map(() => Math.round(Math.random() * 40));

Tests:

Array.concat
var others = array1.concat(array2, array3, array4, array5);
Array.prototype.concat.apply
var others = Array.prototype.concat.apply([], [array1, array2, array3, array4, array5]);
Array.prototype.concat.apply short form
var others = [].concat.apply([], [array1, array2, array3, array4, array5]);
Array.prototype.concat.apply short form without new empty array instance in apply
var others = [].concat.apply(array1, [array2, array3, array4, array5]);
Array.prototype.concat.apply short form without new empty array at all
var others = array1.concat.apply(array1, [array2, array3, array4, array5]);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.concat
Array.prototype.concat.apply
Array.prototype.concat.apply short form
Array.prototype.concat.apply short form without new empty array instance in apply
Array.prototype.concat.apply short form without new empty array at all

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 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/121.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 121 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.concat	1637341.0 Ops/sec
Array.prototype.concat.apply	1407759.0 Ops/sec
Array.prototype.concat.apply short form	1560826.0 Ops/sec
Array.prototype.concat.apply short form without new empty array instance in apply	1203360.0 Ops/sec
Array.prototype.concat.apply short form without new empty array at all	1205535.0 Ops/sec

Array.concat vs Array.prototype.concat.apply (version: 0)

Compare direct concat call with apply for multiple arrays concatenation

Comparing performance of: Array.concat vs Array.prototype.concat.apply vs Array.prototype.concat.apply short form vs Array.prototype.concat.apply short form without new empty array instance in apply vs Array.prototype.concat.apply short form without new empty array at all

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.concat

Array.prototype.concat.apply

Array.prototype.concat.apply short form

Array.prototype.concat.apply short form without new empty array instance in apply

Array.prototype.concat.apply short form without new empty array at all

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A