Benchmark: TextEncoder vs String hash v2

Script Preparation code:

iterations = 1000;
function randomStringGen(n) {
    let strings = [];
    for (let i = 0; i < n; i++) {
      let s = Math.random().toString(36).substring(2, 15) + Math.random().toString(36).substring(2, 15);
      strings[i] = s;
    }
    return strings;
}
var randomStrings = randomStringGen(iterations);
var encoder = new TextEncoder();
var arrayBuffer = new ArrayBuffer(iterations*1000);
var buffer = new Uint8Array(arrayBuffer);

Tests:

Baseline encoder
var j = 0; for (let i = 0; i < iterations; i++) { var str = randomStrings[i % iterations]; buffer[j] = str.length; var res = encoder.encodeInto(str, buffer.subarray(j+1)); j = j + res.written; }
baseline hash
var stringMap = {}; var counter = 0; function stringToMap(s) { var i = stringMap[s]; if (i === undefined) { stringMap[s] = counter++; } else { return i; } } var j = 0; for (let i = 0; i < iterations; i++) { var str = randomStrings[i % iterations]; var num = stringToMap(str); buffer[j] = num; j = j + 8; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Baseline encoder
baseline hash

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: 26 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:125.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/125.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 125 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Baseline encoder	8036.6 Ops/sec
baseline hash	11038.6 Ops/sec

TextEncoder vs String hash v2 (version: 1)

Test TextEncoder encoding vs simply encoding with a string

Comparing performance of: Baseline encoder vs baseline hash

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Baseline encoder

baseline hash

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A