Benchmark: Math.floor Vs parseInt (random and fixed)

Tests:

parseInt
parseInt(Math.random() * 100, 10)
Math.floor
Math.floor(Math.random() * 100)
parseInt - fixed
parseInt(123456789, 10)
Math.floor - fixed
Math.floor(123456789)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
parseInt
Math.floor
parseInt - fixed
Math.floor - fixed

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one month ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 17_6 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) CriOS/126.0.6478.153 Mobile/15E148 Safari/604.1

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile iOS 126 on iOS 17.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
parseInt	10384760.0 Ops/sec
Math.floor	10080236.0 Ops/sec
parseInt - fixed	19107810.0 Ops/sec
Math.floor - fixed	18730416.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its various components.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The provided JSON defines a benchmark that compares the performance of two JavaScript functions: `parseInt` and `Math.floor`. The benchmark is designed to test these functions with both random and fixed input values. There are no specific libraries or special JS features mentioned in this benchmark definition.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the following options:

1. **`parseInt`**: The built-in `parseInt` function, which attempts to convert a string to an integer.
2. **`Math.floor`**: A built-in JavaScript function that returns the largest integer less than or equal to a given number.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

*   **`parseInt`**:
    *   Pros: Efficient for converting strings to integers, handles negative numbers correctly, and is widely supported.
    *   Cons: Can be slower than `Math.floor` due to string parsing and rounding errors, especially with large input values.
*   **`Math.floor`**:
    *   Pros: Simple, fast, and accurate for integer calculations. It doesn't require explicit string conversion like `parseInt`.
    *   Cons: Not designed specifically for converting strings to integers; may produce incorrect results if the input is not an integer.

**Library Usage**

There are no libraries explicitly mentioned in this benchmark definition. However, both `parseInt` and `Math.floor` are built-in JavaScript functions that don't require external library usage.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There's no special JS feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to compare the performance of `parseInt` and `Math.floor` with other approaches, here are some alternatives:

1.  **Manual conversion**: Instead of using `parseInt`, you could manually convert a string to an integer by parsing it character by character or using a regex-based approach.
2.  **Other libraries**: You might consider using dedicated number formatting libraries like Moment.js or Numbro for more complex numeric calculations.
3.  **Custom implementations**: Depending on your specific requirements, you might want to implement your own versions of `parseInt` and `Math.floor` to explore performance differences.

In summary, the provided benchmark focuses on comparing the built-in `parseInt` and `Math.floor` functions with both random and fixed input values. The results will help users understand the relative performance characteristics of these two widely used JavaScript functions in different scenarios.

Related benchmarks:

Math.floor Vs parseInt (random and fixed) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: parseInt vs Math.floor vs parseInt - fixed vs Math.floor - fixed

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

parseInt

Math.floor

parseInt - fixed

Math.floor - fixed

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):