Benchmark: Hash Test - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var alpha = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz";
var test = [];
for(var i = 0; i < 100000; i++){
 test.push(alpha[Math.random() * 26]); 
}

var testStr = test.join("");

function djb2Regular(str) {
    var hash = 5381;
    if (str == null) {
        return hash;
    }
    for (var i = 0; i < str.length; i++) {
        var char = str.charCodeAt(i);
        hash = ((hash << 5) + hash) + char; /* hash * 33 + c */
    }
    return hash;
}

function hashModule(stdlib, foreign, heap) {
  "use asm";

  function djb2Asm(str) {
    var hash = 5381;
    
    if (str == null) {
        return hash;
    }
  	var length = str.length | 0;
    for (var i = 0 | 0; i < length; i++) {
        var char = str.charCodeAt(i) | 0;
        hash = (((hash << 5) + hash) + char) | 0; /* hash * 33 + c */
    }
    return hash | 0;
}

  return { hash: djb2Asm };
}

var djb2Asm = hashModule(window, null, null).hash;

Tests:

regular
djb2Regular(testStr)
asm
djb2Asm(testStr)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
regular
asm

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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition Json**

The provided benchmark definition json represents a hash test, which is designed to measure the performance of two different hashing functions: `djb2Regular` and `hashModule`. The script preparation code generates a large string of random characters, which is then used as input for both hashing functions. The html preparation code is empty in this case.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares two options:

1. **Regular**: This option uses the `djb2Regular` function, which is a JavaScript implementation of the djb2 algorithm. It's a widely used and well-known hashing function.
2. **ASM**: This option uses the `hashModule`, specifically the `djb2Asm` function, which is an assembly language implementation of the djb2 algorithm. It's optimized for performance, especially on platforms that support assembly language.

**Pros and Cons**

**Regular (djb2Regular)**

Pros:

* Wide adoption and familiarity
* Well-documented and widely tested
* Easy to implement in JavaScript

Cons:

* May not be as fast as the assembly language implementation due to overhead of JavaScript interpreter

**ASM (hashModule)**

Pros:

* Optimized for performance, especially on platforms that support assembly language
* Can provide better performance compared to the regular implementation

Cons:

* Requires platform-specific knowledge and expertise in assembly language programming
* May not be compatible with all JavaScript environments

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark is run on a Linux desktop platform using Firefox 115.
* The `hashModule` function uses the `use asm` directive, which enables the use of assembly language code. This requires support for assembly language in the browser or runtime environment.

**Library and Its Purpose**

In this case, there isn't a separate library being used. However, the `djb2Asm` function is an implementation of the djb2 algorithm using assembly language. It's not a standard library function, but rather a custom implementation optimized for performance.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. The code uses standard JavaScript features and syntaxes to implement the hashing functions.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative hashing algorithms or implementations, some popular options include:

* **MD5**: A widely used but insecure hashing algorithm.
* **SHA-256**: A secure hashing algorithm commonly used for data integrity and authenticity.
* **BLAKE2**: A fast and secure hashing algorithm designed for cryptographic purposes.

MeasureThat.net also provides a range of other benchmarks and tests, including web page load times, image compression, and more.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 17 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:131.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/131.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 131 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
regular	263070576.0 Ops/sec
asm	278024128.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Hash Test (version: 2)

Comparing performance of: regular vs asm

Created: 7 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

regular

asm

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):