Benchmark: math pow vs multiply 5 - 2

Tests:

pow
var x = Math.pow(154.1245, 5);
mult
var y = 1; for (var i = 0; i < 5; i++) { y *= 154.1245; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
pow
mult

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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
pow	14169677.0 Ops/sec
mult	310902080.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to explain what's being tested, the options compared, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is defined in JSON format, which includes:

1. **Name**: A unique identifier for the benchmark ("math pow vs multiply 5 - 2").
2. **Description**: An empty string, indicating that there's no description provided.
3. **Script Preparation Code**: An empty string, meaning no code needs to be executed before running the test.
4. **Html Preparation Code**: Also an empty string, suggesting no HTML-related setup is required.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **pow**
	* The benchmark definition uses `Math.pow(154.1245, 5)` to calculate the power of a number.
2. **mult**
	* This test case involves a loop that multiplies a value (154.1245) by 1 in a `for` loop five times.

**Options Compared**

These two test cases are designed to compare the performance of different approaches:

1. ** pow**: Using the built-in `Math.pow()` function.
2. **mult**: Implementing the multiplication manually using a loop.

**Pros and Cons**

* **pow**:
	+ Pros: Faster execution time, as it leverages the optimized implementation of `Math.pow()`.
	+ Cons: May not be suitable for all scenarios where manual calculations are necessary or desired.
* **mult**:
	+ Pros: Allows for more control over the calculation process and potentially more efficient use of resources in certain situations.
	+ Cons: Generally slower execution time due to the overhead of the loop and manual multiplication.

**Library Usage**

In both test cases, no libraries are explicitly mentioned. However, `Math` is a built-in JavaScript library that provides mathematical functions like `pow()`.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There's no mention of special JavaScript features or syntax in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing the performance of two basic arithmetic operations.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to consider alternative approaches, here are some examples:

* Using a library like [Big.js](https://github.com/mike-creighton/big.js) for arbitrary-precision arithmetic.
* Implementing a custom loop-free multiplication algorithm, such as the [Karatsuba multiplication algorithm](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karatsuba_algorithm).
* Utilizing hardware acceleration or vectorization techniques to optimize the calculations.

In general, when creating benchmarks, it's essential to consider the specific requirements and constraints of your project, as well as the trade-offs between performance, code readability, and maintainability.

Related benchmarks:

math pow vs multiply 5 - 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: pow vs mult

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

pow

mult

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):