Benchmark: acos vs atan - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

acos vs atan

Script Preparation code:

var N = 1000000;
var x = new Float32Array(N);
var y = new Float32Array(N);

for (var i = 0; i < N; ++i ) {
	x[i] = 100* Math.random();
	y[i] = 100* Math.random();
}

Tests:

acos
for (var i = 0; i < N; ++i) { Math.acos(x[i] / Math.sqrt(x[i]*x[i] + y[i]*y[i])); }
atan
for (var i = 0; i < N; ++i) { Math.atan(x[i], y[i]); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
acos
atan

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition Overview**

The provided JSON defines two JavaScript microbenchmarks: `acos` and `atan`. Both benchmarks are designed to measure the performance of these mathematical functions in a loop.

**Test Case 1: acos**

The `acos` test case iterates over a large array (`N = 1000000`) containing random values, calculates the inverse cosine of each value using the formula:

`Math.acos(x[i] / Math.sqrt(x[i]*x[i] + y[i]*y[i]));`

This is the benchmark definition.

**Test Case 2: atan**

The `atan` test case also iterates over a large array (`N = 1000000`) containing random values, calculates the inverse tangent of each pair of values (x and y) using the formula:

`Math.atan(x[i], y[i]);`

This is the benchmark definition.

**Comparison of Options**

The two benchmarks compare the performance of `acos` and `atan` functions in JavaScript. The choice between these two functions depends on the specific use case and requirements.

Pros and Cons of Each Approach:

* **acos**: The inverse cosine function (`Math.acos`) is more expensive than the inverse tangent function (`Math.atan`) due to its higher mathematical complexity.
	+ Pros: `acos` is often used in scenarios where the input angle is close to 0 or π, making it a good choice for certain types of calculations.
	+ Cons: It's slower and less efficient than `atan`.
* **atan**: The inverse tangent function (`Math.atan`) is generally faster and more efficient than `acos`, but it may not be suitable for all use cases where the input angle is close to 0 or π.

**Library Usage**

Neither of the provided benchmark definitions uses any external libraries. Both tests are self-contained, relying on built-in JavaScript functions (`Math`).

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these benchmarks. The code follows standard JavaScript conventions and does not utilize any advanced features like async/await, closures, or functional programming.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to `acos` and `atan` include:

* Using libraries like MathJS or numjs for high-performance numerical computations.
* Implementing custom inverse cosine and tangent functions using iterative methods (e.g., Newton's method).
* Utilizing specialized hardware acceleration, such as GPU-based implementations, to improve performance.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might add additional complexity and dependencies to your codebase.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one month ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 13; motorola edge 20) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/111.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36 ABB/3.4.5

Browser/OS: Edge 0.0 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
acos	1.0 Ops/sec
atan	1.9 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

acos vs atan (version: 0)

acos vs atan

Comparing performance of: acos vs atan

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

acos

atan

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):