Benchmark: Between with AND vs Between with modulo

Script Preparation code:

var cx = 455;

Tests:

AND
if(cx < 128 && cy > 448 && cy < 480){return true}
MODULO
if(cx < 128 && 480 % cy < 32){return true}

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
AND
MODULO

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the benchmark and its components.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two different approaches for checking if a certain range condition is met in JavaScript. The test cases use bitwise operators (`&&` and `%`) and perform simple arithmetic calculations.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **AND (Bitwise AND)**: This test case uses the `&&` operator to check if the value of `cx` is less than 128, and simultaneously checks if the value of `cy` is greater than 448 and less than 480. The condition returns `true` only if all three conditions are met.
2. **MODULO (Bitwise MOD)**: This test case uses the modulo operator (`%`) to check if the remainder of dividing `cx` by 128 is less than 32, and simultaneously checks if the value of `cy` is within a certain range (448 to 480). The condition returns `true` only if both conditions are met.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares two different approaches:

1. **Bitwise AND**: This approach uses the `&&` operator to perform multiple bitwise comparisons in a single statement.
2. **Bitwise MOD**: This approach uses the modulo operator (`%`) to check for divisibility and remainder conditions.

**Pros and Cons**

Both approaches have their pros and cons:

* **Bitwise AND**:
	+ Pros: Simple, straightforward implementation, potentially faster due to fewer function calls.
	+ Cons: May be less efficient than `MODULO` if the comparison conditions are complex or non-adjacent.
* **Bitwise MOD**:
	+ Pros: Can simplify code for certain comparison scenarios, potentially faster for certain types of calculations (e.g., divisibility checks).
	+ Cons: Requires an additional modulo operation, which may introduce overhead.

**Library and Special JS Features**

There is no library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, some libraries or extensions might be used to modify or extend the JavaScript engine's behavior. The `cx` variable seems to be a special constant defined in the script preparation code (e.g., `var cx = 455;`). This value might not have any inherent significance but is used as a test case input.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches could be considered:

* Using separate comparison functions for each condition, rather than combining them with bitwise operators.
* Implementing custom bitwise operations or micro-optimizations using compiler-specific features (e.g., SIMD instructions).
* Comparing the performance of different JavaScript engines or interpreters (not explicitly mentioned in this benchmark).

Keep in mind that the specific choices of approach and optimization techniques will depend on the target use case, hardware architecture, and desired trade-offs between speed, code readability, and maintainability.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/66.0.3359.139 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 66 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
AND	12225773.0 Ops/sec
MODULO	12221275.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Between with AND vs Between with modulo (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: AND vs MODULO

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

AND

MODULO

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):