Benchmark: JS Array IndexOf vs includes vs findIndex vs find 3

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [];
var i = 0;

while (i < 15001) {arr[i] =i.toString(); i++};

Tests:

indexOf
const index = arr.indexOf("15000");
includes
const included = arr.includes("15000");
find
const item = arr.find(item => item === "15000");
findIndex
const index = arr.findIndex(item => item === "15000");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
indexOf
includes
find
findIndex

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of four different methods to search for an element in an array:

1. `indexOf()`
2. `includes()`
3. `find()`
4. `findIndex()``

These methods are commonly used in JavaScript to find a specific value within an array.

**Method Descriptions and Comparison**

Here's a brief overview of each method:

*   **`indexOf()`**: This method returns the index of the first occurrence of a specified element in an array. If the element is not found, it returns -1.
*   **`includes()`**: This method checks if an element exists within an array. It returns true if the element is found, and false otherwise.
*   **`find()`**: This method finds the value at the index of the specified element in an array. If no such index exists, it returns undefined.
*   **`findIndex()`**: Similar to `indexOf()`, but returns the index of the first occurrence of a specified element.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of these four methods when searching for a specific value (`"15000"` in this case) within an array of 15,001 elements. The options are compared in terms of:

*   **Number of executions per second**: This measures how many times each method executes per second on the same dataset.
*   **Execution time**: Although not explicitly measured, we can infer that `includes()` is likely to be faster than `indexOf()` and `findIndex()`, which require more computations.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief analysis of the pros and cons for each method:

*   **`indexOf()`**: Pros: Generally fast. Cons: Returns -1 if not found, which can be misleading.
*   **`includes()`**: Pros: Faster than `indexOf()` and `findIndex()`. Cons: May trigger more computations due to its nature of iterating through the array.
*   **`find()`** and **`findIndex()`**: These methods are similar but have different return types. Generally faster than `indexOf()`, but might be slower for very large arrays.

Keep in mind that these optimizations can be highly dependent on specific use cases, data distributions, and browser implementations.

**Library Used (None)**

No specific libraries are mentioned or used in this benchmark.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The use of arrow functions (`item => item === "15000"`) is a modern JavaScript syntax introduced in ECMAScript 2015. It's a concise way to define small, one-time-use functions.

**Alternatives**

Some alternatives to the above methods include:

*   **`binarySearch()`**: This method uses a binary search algorithm to find an element within an array, which can be faster for large arrays but has different usage patterns.
*   **`filter()`**: While not designed for direct value lookup like `indexOf()`, `includes()`, and `findIndex()`, it can be used creatively for similar purposes.
*   **Other specialized algorithms or library functions**, such as those optimized for specific array types (e.g., sparse arrays) or data structures, might provide better performance depending on the specific requirements of your application.

The alternatives are not directly comparable to `indexOf()` and `includes()`, but they may offer different trade-offs in terms of readability, flexibility, or performance.

In summary, this benchmark provides a useful comparison of four commonly used JavaScript methods for searching elements within arrays. The results help identify which method is likely to be the fastest for specific use cases, keeping in mind that actual performance can vary based on many factors.

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/100.0.4896.75 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 100 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
indexOf	68850.2 Ops/sec
includes	71530.8 Ops/sec
find	8101.5 Ops/sec
findIndex	5986.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

JS Array IndexOf vs includes vs findIndex vs find 3 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: indexOf vs includes vs find vs findIndex

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

indexOf

includes

find

findIndex

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):