Benchmark: .sort() vs Math.min / Math.max

Script Preparation code:

const arr = [2,35,67,3,7,58,433,13,23,1];

Tests:

Array.sort
const arr = [2,35,67,3,7,58,433,13,23,1]; const a = arr.sort(); const min = a[0]; const max = a[1];
Math min and max
const arr = [2,35,67,3,7,58,433,13,23,1]; const min = Math.min(...arr); const max = Math.max(...arr);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.sort
Math min and max

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and analyze what is being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares two approaches to find the minimum and maximum values in an array: `Array.sort()` followed by accessing the first and second elements (`a[0]` and `a[1]`) versus using `Math.min()` and `Math.max()` with the spread operator (`...arr`).

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **"Array.sort"**: This test case uses the `sort()` method to sort the array, then accesses the first element (`min`) and second element (`max`) of the sorted array.
2. **"Math min and max"**: This test case uses `Math.min()` and `Math.max()` with the spread operator (`...arr`) to find the minimum and maximum values in the original unsorted array.

**Libraries and Features**

In this benchmark, there is no specific library being used beyond what is part of the JavaScript standard library. However, it's worth noting that `Array.prototype.sort()` uses a stable sorting algorithm (Timsort) under the hood, which can have implications for performance in certain scenarios.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special features or syntax being used in this benchmark, but it's worth mentioning that the use of spread operator (`...arr`) is supported by JavaScript starting from ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).

**Pros and Cons of Approaches**

Here's a brief analysis of each approach:

1. **"Array.sort"**:
	* Pros:
		+ Can be more intuitive for finding minimum and maximum values in an array.
		+ Does not require the use of separate `min()` and `max()` functions.
	* Cons:
		+ Sorts the entire array, which can be inefficient if the array is large or contains duplicate values.
		+ May have additional overhead due to the sorting algorithm used (Timsort).
2. **"Math min and max"**:
	* Pros:
		+ Does not require sorting the array.
		+ Can be more efficient for small arrays or arrays with unique values.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires using separate `min()` and `max()` functions, which may be less intuitive.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to find minimum and maximum values in an array, some other options include:

1. **Using `reduce()`**: You can use the `reduce()` method to find the minimum and maximum values in an array by applying a custom reducer function.
```javascript
arr.reduce((min, current) => min < current ? min : current);
arr.reduce((max, current) => max > current ? max : current);
```
2. **Using `Math.min()` and `Math.max()` with `Array.prototype.every()`**: You can use `every()` to find the minimum and maximum values in an array by checking if each element is greater than or equal to the current min/max value.
```javascript
arr.reduce((min, current) => min < current ? current : min);
arr.reduce((max, current) => max > current ? current : max);
```
These alternatives may have different performance characteristics and use cases compared to the approaches tested in this benchmark.

I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any further questions or need more information.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 OPR/106.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Opera 106 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.sort	3008409.0 Ops/sec
Math min and max	3677622.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

.sort() vs Math.min / Math.max (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array.sort vs Math min and max

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.sort

Math min and max

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):