Benchmark: Date.now() vs performance.now()324234

Script Preparation code:

var times = [];

Tests:

performance.now
performance.now()
Date.now
Date.now()

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
performance.now
Date.now

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two benchmark definitions: `Date.now()` and `performance.now()`. These are both methods used to measure time in JavaScript, but they have different origins and usage patterns.

`Date.now()` returns the number of milliseconds since January 1, 1970, 00:00:00 UTC. This method is part of the built-in `Date` object and is often used for simple timing measurements.

`performance.now()`, on the other hand, returns the value (in fractional seconds) of a performance counter, which is a timestamp that represents a continuous, monotonically increasing value. This method is specifically designed to measure short periods of time and is more suitable for measuring frame rates or response times in interactive applications.

**Options compared**

The two benchmark definitions are being tested against each other, with `Date.now()` serving as the "baseline" or "manual" timing measurement, while `performance.now()` uses the browser's performance counter to measure time. This comparison allows users to see which method is more accurate and reliable for their specific use case.

**Pros and Cons**

- **Manual Timing (Date.now())**: Pros:
	+ Simple and straightforward
	+ Works in most environments, including older browsers
Cons:
	+ May not be as accurate due to system clock variations
	+ Can be affected by various factors, such as network latency or CPU usage

- **Performance Counter (performance.now())**: Pros:
	+ More accurate and reliable for short periods of time
	+ Designed specifically for measuring performance-related metrics
Cons:
	+ May not work in older browsers that don't support the `performance` API
	+ Can be affected by browser-specific optimizations or rendering overhead

**Library usage**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the provided JSON. However, if you're using a modern JavaScript framework like React or Angular, you might be relying on libraries like `react-dom` or `angular/core` that provide implementation details for these timing measurements.

**Special JS feature/syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntax mentioned in the provided information. Both `Date.now()` and `performance.now()` are standard JavaScript methods.

**Alternatives**

If you need to measure time in JavaScript, here are some alternative approaches:

1. **setTimeout() and clearTimeout()**: You can use these functions to create a simple timer that measures the execution time of a block of code.
2. **requestAnimationFrame() and cancelRequestAnimationFrame()**: These functions provide a more accurate way to measure frame rates or animation timing in web applications.
3. **Web Performance API**: This API provides a set of methods for measuring performance-related metrics, such as response times, load times, and memory usage.

Keep in mind that the choice of measurement method depends on your specific use case and the requirements of your project.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/85.0.4183.102 Safari/537.36 Edg/85.0.564.51

Browser/OS: Chrome 85 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
performance.now	2088262.4 Ops/sec
Date.now	3370960.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Date.now() vs performance.now()324234 (version: 0)

Performance measure can be slow

Comparing performance of: performance.now vs Date.now

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

performance.now

Date.now

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):