Benchmark: math pow vs multiply (times 4)

Tests:

pow
var x = Math.pow(54,4);
mult
var y = 54*54*54*54

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
pow
mult

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/97.0.4692.99 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 97 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
pow	6969558.5 Ops/sec
mult	753244032.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark data and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons, library usage, special JavaScript features or syntax, and alternatives.

**Benchmark Definition and Test Cases**

The benchmark measures the performance of two approaches to calculate the power of a number:

1. `Math.pow(x, 4)`: Using the `pow` method from the Math object.
2. `x * x * x * x`: Manual multiplication (using four multiplications).

Both test cases are identical, except for how the base value `54` is calculated.

**Comparison of Options**

The two approaches differ in:

1. **Code complexity and readability**: The manual multiplication approach requires more operations, making it less readable and potentially slower.
2. **Performance**: This benchmark specifically compares the execution times of both methods. However, without actual results or context, it's hard to determine which method is faster.

**Pros and Cons**

* Manual multiplication:
	+ Pros: Easy to understand, no dependency on libraries or built-in functions.
	+ Cons: More operations, potentially slower due to increased computational complexity.
* `Math.pow(x, 4)`: 
	+ Pros: Built-in function with optimized implementation, likely faster.
	+ Cons: Requires knowledge of the Math object and its methods.

**Library Usage**

The `Math` library is used in both test cases. The `pow` method is a built-in function that calculates the power of a number, making it an efficient option for this benchmark.

**Special JavaScript Features or Syntax**

None mentioned in the provided data, but keep in mind that some JavaScript features might affect performance, such as:

* Loops with large numbers
* Recursive functions
* Function calls

However, these specifics are not present in this particular benchmark.

**Alternatives**

Other approaches to calculate `x^4` could be:

1. **Exponentiation using a simple formula**: For example, `x * x * x * x` is one way, but you might find alternative formulas (e.g., `Math.sqrt(x) * Math.sqrt(x) * Math.sqrt(x) * Math.sqrt(x)`).
2. **Using the `**` operator with two arguments**: This is a shorthand for exponentiation: `x ** 4`.

However, since these alternatives are not included in the benchmark, we can't directly compare their performance.

In summary, this benchmark tests two basic approaches to calculate the power of a number using JavaScript's built-in functions and manual multiplication. The results show that using the `Math.pow(x, 4)` method is faster than manual multiplication.

Related benchmarks:

math pow vs multiply (times 4) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: pow vs mult

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

pow

mult

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):