Benchmark: json stringify vs object tostring

Script Preparation code:

function makeTestData() { return { name: "Matheus de Sousa Martins", age: 30, phone: "999999999999" }; }

Tests:

toString
makeTestData().toString()
JSON.stringify
JSON.stringify(makeTestData());

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
toString
JSON.stringify

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 22 hours ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
toString	49524660.0 Ops/sec
JSON.stringify	4599067.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**What is tested?**

The provided benchmark compares the performance of two ways to convert an object to a string:

1. `toString()`: This method calls the `ToString()` method on the object, which returns a string representation of the object.
2. `JSON.stringify()`: This method converts the object to a JSON string.

**Options compared**

The two options being compared are:

* `toString()`: This is a built-in JavaScript method that attempts to provide a human-readable representation of an object. However, its behavior can be unpredictable and may not always produce the expected results.
* `JSON.stringify()`: This method provides a more standardized way to convert objects to strings, following the JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) format.

**Pros and Cons**

**`toString()`**

Pros:

* It's a built-in JavaScript method, so it's likely to be optimized for performance.
* It can produce a human-readable representation of an object.

Cons:

* Its behavior can be unpredictable and may not always produce the expected results.
* It can be slower than `JSON.stringify()`, especially for large objects.

**`JSON.stringify()`**

Pros:

* Provides a standardized way to convert objects to strings, following the JSON format.
* Can be faster than `toString()` for large objects.
* Can handle complex data structures and nested objects more accurately.

Cons:

* It's not as human-readable as `toString()`.
* It may produce a larger string than needed, especially if the object has many properties or nested objects.

**Library and syntax considerations**

In this benchmark, no libraries are used. However, it's worth noting that `JSON.stringify()` uses the `Stringify` method from the `JSON` object, which is part of the JavaScript standard library.

No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in these benchmarks. The focus is on comparing the performance of two basic methods for converting objects to strings.

**Other alternatives**

If you want to explore other options, here are a few:

* Using a library like `lodash` or `json-stringify-safe`, which provide more advanced and flexible ways to convert objects to strings.
* Using a JSON parser like `json.parse()` instead of `JSON.stringify()`.
* Using a different method, such as `Object.keys()`, `Object.values()`, or `String.fromCharCode()`, to create a string representation of the object.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not be relevant to this specific benchmark, and their performance may vary depending on the use case.

Related benchmarks:

json stringify vs object tostring (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: toString vs JSON.stringify

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

toString

JSON.stringify

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):