Benchmark: find vs findIndex vs filter

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [];
var i = 0;

while (i <= 1E5) arr[i] = i++;

Tests:

Array.prototype.find
const item = arr.find(item => item == 1E5);
Array.prototype.findIndex
const index = arr.findIndex(item => item == 1E5);
filter
const item = arr.filter(item => item == 1E5);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.prototype.find
Array.prototype.findIndex
filter

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Description**

The benchmark is designed to measure the performance of three JavaScript methods: `Array.prototype.find()`, `Array.prototype.findIndex()`, and `filter()` (without using the prototype chain, i.e., a custom function). The goal is to determine which method is the fastest for finding an item with a specific value in an array.

**Options Compared**

The three options being compared are:

1. **`Array.prototype.find()`**: This method searches for the first occurrence of a specified value in an array and returns the element.
2. **`Array.prototype.findIndex()`**: This method finds the index of the first occurrence of a specified value in an array and returns it. If no such value is found, -1 is returned.
3. **`filter()` (without prototype chain)**: This method creates a new array with all elements that pass the test implemented by the provided function.

**Pros and Cons**

*   `Array.prototype.find()`: Pros:
    *   Efficient for finding a single item.
    *   Uses binary search under the hood, making it relatively fast.
    Cons:
    *   May not work well if the array is very large or sparse.
    *   Only finds the first occurrence of the specified value.
*   `Array.prototype.findIndex()` Pros:
    *   Returns the index of the found item, which can be useful for subsequent processing.
    Cons:
    *   Returns -1 if no matching item is found, requiring additional checks.
    *   May not be as efficient as `find()` in some cases (depending on browser implementation).
*   Custom `filter()` Pros:
    *   More flexible and customizable than built-in methods.
    Con:
    *   Requires manual implementation of the filtering logic, which can lead to more complex code.

**Library Used**

None. The benchmark uses only standard JavaScript functions.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax (Not Applicable)**

No special features or syntax are used in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to test other methods for finding an item in an array, some alternatives could include:

*   `forEach()`: Loops through the array and checks each element individually. This can be slower than using `find()` or `filter()`.
*   `reduce()`: A method that reduces an array to a single value by applying a callback function to each element. It's not typically used for finding a specific item.
*   `some()`: Similar to `forEach()`, but returns a boolean indicating whether at least one element matches the specified condition.

To test these alternatives, you would need to modify the benchmark definition and script preparation code accordingly.

Keep in mind that the performance of these methods can vary depending on the browser, device, and specific use case.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/104.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 104 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.prototype.find	1045.2 Ops/sec
Array.prototype.findIndex	1025.6 Ops/sec
filter	991.6 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

find vs findIndex vs filter (version: 0)

Measuring which is faster

Comparing performance of: Array.prototype.find vs Array.prototype.findIndex vs filter

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.prototype.find

Array.prototype.findIndex

filter

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):