Benchmark: Date.now() vs new Date().getTime()

Script Preparation code:

var timestamp = null;

Tests:

Date.now()
timestamp = Date.now();
new Date().getTime();
timestamp = new Date().getTime();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Date.now()
new Date().getTime();

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript benchmarking test case for measuring the performance difference between `Date.now()` and `new Date().getTime()`. This test is designed to evaluate the speed of these two functions in different browsers.

**What's being tested?**

Two functions are compared:

1. `Date.now()`: Returns the number of milliseconds since the Unix epoch (January 1, 1970) as a 32-bit integer.
2. `new Date().getTime()`: Returns the number of milliseconds since the Unix epoch (January 1, 1970) as a 64-bit integer.

**Options being compared**

The test case is comparing the performance of these two functions in different browsers.

Pros and Cons:

* `Date.now()`:
	+ Pros: Generally faster and more concise than `new Date().getTime()`.
	+ Cons: Returns an integer value, which may not be suitable for all use cases.
* `new Date().getTime()`:
	+ Pros: Returns a floating-point number with higher precision, making it suitable for applications requiring high accuracy.
	+ Cons: Generally slower and less concise than `Date.now()`.

**Other considerations**

The choice between `Date.now()` and `new Date().getTime()` depends on the specific use case:

* Use `Date.now()` when:
	+ You need to measure time intervals with a small margin of error (e.g., milliseconds).
	+ Code readability is more important than brevity.
* Use `new Date().getTime()` when:
	+ You require high precision in your timing measurements.
	+ You're working with legacy code or need to maintain compatibility.

**Library and special JS feature**

There are no libraries or special JavaScript features mentioned in the benchmarking test case. It solely focuses on comparing two native functions within JavaScript.

**Other alternatives**

If you want to measure the performance of other date-related functions or compare them with non-native JavaScript functions, you might consider using alternative benchmarks or libraries, such as:

* `Date.now()` vs `performance.now()`: A comparison between the two methods for measuring elapsed time.
* `new Date().getTime()` vs `Date.parse()`: An evaluation of the performance differences between these two functions for parsing dates.

Keep in mind that each test case requires careful consideration of the specific requirements and constraints of your application.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 10 hours ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:132.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/132.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 132 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Date.now()	13568326.0 Ops/sec
new Date().getTime();	9435942.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Date.now() vs new Date().getTime() (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Date.now() vs new Date().getTime();

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Date.now()

new Date().getTime();

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):