Benchmark: Math.max vs. custom max

Script Preparation code:

let lowerBound = -Number.MAX_VALUE;
function max() {
    let maximum = lowerBound;
    let i = arguments.length;
    while (i--) {
        arguments[i] > maximum && (maximum = arguments[i])
    }
    return maximum;
};

Tests:

Math.max
return Math.max(1,21,53,12,58,65,32,12,445,9382,132,12398,1239812, 21938721, 981, 91283, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 102183129312)
Custom
return max(1,21,53,12,58,65,32,12,445,9382,132,12398,1239812, 21938721, 981, 91283, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 102183129312)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Math.max
Custom

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gemma2:9b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

This benchmark compares the performance of JavaScript's built-in `Math.max()` function against a custom implementation of finding the maximum value from an array of numbers.

**Options Compared:**

* **`Math.max()`:** This is a native JavaScript function designed specifically to find the maximum value within a set of numbers provided as arguments.
* **Custom Implementation:** The `max()` function defined in the script preparation code iterates through the provided arguments, comparing each with the current maximum value and updating it if a larger value is found.

**Pros/Cons:**

* **`Math.max()`:** 
    * **Pros:**  Simple to use, generally optimized by JavaScript engines.
    * **Cons:** Can be less flexible than a custom implementation if you need to handle specific edge cases or apply additional logic during the comparison.
* **Custom Implementation:** 
    * **Pros:** Potentially more control over the comparison process, allowing for customization based on your needs.
    * **Cons:**  Might be slightly slower than `Math.max()` due to the manual iteration and comparison logic.

**Other Considerations:**

* In most cases, `Math.max()` is a good choice because it's concise and highly optimized by JavaScript engines. 
* A custom implementation might be preferred if you have specific requirements beyond simply finding the maximum value (e.g., handling negative numbers differently, comparing objects instead of numbers).

**Alternatives:**

*  Other libraries like Lodash or Underscore provide functions for finding the maximum value (`_.max()`, `lodash.max()`), which often offer additional features and customization options.

Let me know if you have any more questions!

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/89.0.4379.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 89 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Math.max	7773958.5 Ops/sec
Custom	7759744.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Math.max vs. custom max (version: 0)

N/A

Comparing performance of: Math.max vs Custom

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Math.max

Custom

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gemma2:9b, generated 27 days ago):