Benchmark: Which equals operator (== with type coercion vs ===) is faster?

Tests:

test equality with coercion
var n = 0; while(true) { n++; if(n=='100000') break; }
test strict equality
var n = 0; while(true) { n++; if(n===100000) break; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
test equality with coercion
test strict equality

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/105.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 105 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
test equality with coercion	668.6 Ops/sec
test strict equality	9416.6 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON data and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is checking which equals operator (`==` vs `===`) is faster, considering type coercion. The question seems to imply that using `===` instead of `==` can provide a performance benefit due to its more precise comparison. However, in modern JavaScript, the difference between these two operators is often negligible.

**Options being compared**

There are two options being compared:

1. **Equality with coercion (`==`)**
2. **Strict equality (`===`)**

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

* **Equality with coercion (`==`):**
	+ Pros:
		- Widely supported in older browsers and environments.
		- May be faster due to type coercion, although this is debated.
	+ Cons:
		- Can lead to unexpected behavior if not careful (e.g., comparing strings with numbers).
		- Less precise than strict equality.
* **Strict equality (`===`):**
	+ Pros:
		- More precise and predictable.
		- Better for comparing values without considering types.
	+ Cons:
		- May be slower due to additional checks.
		- Not supported in older browsers or environments.

**Library used:**

In the provided test case, a `while` loop is used to increment a variable (`n`) until it reaches 100,000. No external libraries are mentioned.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

None of the provided code uses any special JavaScript features or syntax (e.g., async/await, arrow functions, ES6 classes).

**Other considerations:**

Keep in mind that this benchmark only tests the performance difference between `==` and `===` operators. In real-world scenarios, it's often better to prioritize code readability and maintainability over minor performance optimizations.

**Alternatives:**

If you're looking for alternative approaches or want to explore other optimization techniques:

* For a more precise comparison, consider using a library like [Benchmark.js](https://www.benchmarkjs.com/).
* If you need to compare values without considering types, consider using the ` ===` operator with a type guard (e.g., checking if `n` is an integer before comparing it to 100,000).

In conclusion, this benchmark provides insight into the performance difference between `==` and `===` operators in JavaScript. However, for most use cases, the benefits of strict equality (`===`) outweigh any potential performance gains from using coercion (`==`).

Related benchmarks:

Which equals operator (== with type coercion vs ===) is faster? (version: 0)

Is there a performance benefit to replacing == with ===?

Comparing performance of: test equality with coercion vs test strict equality

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

test equality with coercion

test strict equality

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):