Benchmark: Math.max() vs Array.reduce() for array of objects

Script Preparation code:

var values = new Array(5000);

for (let i = 0; i < values.length; ++i) {
    values[i] = { version : i };
}

Tests:

Math.max
return Math.max(...values.map(({ version }) => version));
Reduce
return values.reduce((prev, current) => (prev.version > current.version) ? prev : current, 1)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Math.max
Reduce

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares the performance of `Math.max()` and `Array.reduce()` functions on an array of objects.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code generates an array of 5,000 objects with a unique `version` property. This code is executed before running each benchmark test case to ensure consistency in the input data.

```javascript
var values = new Array(5000);

for (let i = 0; i < values.length; ++i) {
    values[i] = { version: i };
}
```

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means that this benchmark only tests the JavaScript engine's performance without considering any DOM-related overhead.

**Benchmark Definition**

The `Benchmark Definition` field contains two test cases:

1. **Math.max()**: This benchmark uses `Math.max()` function to find the maximum value in the array of objects.
2. **Array.reduce()**: This benchmark uses `Array.prototype.reduce()` method to achieve the same result as `Math.max()`.

**Library**

Neither of these functions relies on a specific library, so there are no external dependencies to consider.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

Both `Math.max()` and `Array.prototype.reduce()` use JavaScript's built-in features:

* `Math.max()` uses the spread operator (`...`) to unpack the array elements.
* `Array.prototype.reduce()` uses an arrow function as its callback function and a starting value of 1.

**Comparison Options**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches:

* **`Math.max()`**: Uses the built-in `Math.max()` function, which is optimized for performance.
* **`Array.prototype.reduce()`**: Uses the `Array.prototype.reduce()` method, which iterates over the array elements using a callback function.

**Pros and Cons**

**`Math.max()`**:
	+ Pros:
		- Optimized for performance
		- Simple and concise syntax
	+ Cons:
		- Limited to finding the maximum value in an array of numbers or simple objects (not suitable for complex data structures)
		- Not as flexible as `Array.prototype.reduce()`

**`Array.prototype.reduce()`**:
	+ Pros:
		- Flexible and reusable for various use cases
		- Can be used with complex data structures
	+ Cons:
		- Less efficient than `Math.max()` due to its iterative nature
		- Requires a callback function, which can add complexity

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to find the maximum value in an array of objects and want alternative approaches:

* **`Array.prototype.every()`**: While not designed specifically for finding the maximum value, `every()` can be used with a callback function that iterates over the array elements and returns a boolean indicating whether the current element is greater than or equal to the accumulator. However, this approach is less efficient and more complex than using `Math.max()` or `Array.prototype.reduce()`.
* **`Array.prototype.every()`** with a custom comparison function: You can write your own custom comparison function that iterates over the array elements and returns the maximum value.

In summary, the choice between `Math.max()` and `Array.prototype.reduce()` depends on the specific use case and performance requirements. If you need to find the maximum value in an array of objects, `Math.max()` is likely a better choice due to its optimized performance and concise syntax. However, if you need more flexibility or can optimize your code for performance, `Array.prototype.reduce()` may be a viable alternative.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/87.0.4280.88 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 87 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Math.max	20132.6 Ops/sec
Reduce	24915.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Math.max() vs Array.reduce() for array of objects (version: 0)

Compare speed of Math.max() vs Array.reduce().

Comparing performance of: Math.max vs Reduce

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Math.max

Reduce

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):