Benchmark: toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.floor() vs Math.floorfast vs new Math.trunc

toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.floor() vs Math.floorfast vs new Math.trunc (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: toFixed(4) vs toPrecision(4).toString() vs (Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString() vs Math.floor fast vs the new Math.trunc

Comparing performance of: toFixed(4) someFloat.toFixed(4); someFloat.t vs toPrecision(4).toString() vs (Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString() vs Math.floor fast vs Math.trunc

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Script Preparation code:

var someFloat = 0.123456789;

Tests:

toFixed(4) someFloat.toFixed(4); someFloat.t
someFloat.toFixed(0);
toPrecision(4).toString()
someFloat.toPrecision(1);
(Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString()
Math.floor(someFloat)
Math.floor fast
~~(someFloat * 10000) / 10000;
Math.trunc
Math.trunc(someFloat);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
toFixed(4) someFloat.toFixed(4); someFloat.t
toPrecision(4).toString()
(Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString()
Math.floor fast
Math.trunc

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/94.0.4606.81 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 94 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
toFixed(4) someFloat.toFixed(4); someFloat.t	4443419.0 Ops/sec
toPrecision(4).toString()	4166952.5 Ops/sec
(Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString()	4205211.5 Ops/sec
Math.floor fast	11983523.0 Ops/sec
Math.trunc	4261278.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks and explore what's being tested on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of five different ways to round or truncate numbers in JavaScript:

1. `toFixed(4)`: uses the `toFixed` method with a precision of 4
2. `toPrecision(4).toString()`: uses the `toPrecision` method followed by converting the result to a string using `toString`
3. `(Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString()`: uses the `round` function from the Math library, multiplying the input by 10,000, rounding, and then dividing by 10,000
4. `~~(someFloat * 10000) / 10000;`: uses the bitwise NOT operator (`~`) to simulate a round-to-nearest-even behavior, equivalent to `Math.floor` (not exactly but close enough for this benchmark)
5. `Math.trunc(someFloat);`: uses the new `trunc` function introduced in ECMAScript 2020

**Options Compared**

The options being compared are:

* Rounding and truncation techniques: `toFixed`, `toPrecision`, `(Math.round(*10000)/10000)`, `~~(someFloat * 10000) / 10000;`, and `Math.trunc`
* Precision levels: 0, 1, and 4

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief overview of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. `toFixed(4)`:
	* Pros: simple, widely supported
	* Cons: can be slower due to string conversion
2. `toPrecision(4).toString()`:
	* Pros: provides more control over rounding behavior
	* Cons: involves an extra function call and string conversion
3. `(Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString()`:
	* Pros: uses Math library functions, which can be optimized by browsers
	* Cons: multiplication and division operations can introduce overhead
4. `~~(someFloat * 10000) / 10000;`:
	* Pros: similar to `Math.floor`, but with a more modern twist
	* Cons: relies on bitwise NOT operator, which may not be supported in older browsers
5. `Math.trunc(someFloat);`:
	* Pros: new and optimized for performance
	* Cons: relatively new function, may not be widely supported

**Other Considerations**

When choosing a rounding or truncation technique, consider the following factors:

* **Precision**: How many decimal places are required?
* **Rounding mode**: Do you need to round to nearest even, odd, or half-even?
* **Performance**: Are speed and efficiency critical?

**Library Usage**

The `toPrecision` method is used in the benchmark, which is part of the JavaScript API. It's a powerful function that allows for more control over rounding behavior.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

This benchmark uses bitwise NOT operator (`~`) to simulate round-to-nearest-even behavior in older browsers. This feature is not unique to this benchmark and can be used elsewhere in JavaScript code.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, consider the following:

* Use a library like [round-md](https://github.com/mccannj/round-md) or [numeral](https://github.com/evan Networks/numeral) for precise and efficient rounding.
* Implement your own rounding algorithm using bit manipulation, floating-point arithmetic, or other techniques.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not be as widely supported or optimized as the original functions.

Related benchmarks:

toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.floor() vs Math.floorfast vs new Math.trunc (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: toFixed(4) vs toPrecision(4).toString() vs (Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString() vs Math.floor fast vs the new Math.trunc

Comparing performance of: toFixed(4) someFloat.toFixed(4); someFloat.t vs toPrecision(4).toString() vs (Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString() vs Math.floor fast vs Math.trunc

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

toFixed(4) someFloat.toFixed(4); someFloat.t

toPrecision(4).toString()

(Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString()

Math.floor fast

Math.trunc

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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