jsPerf.app is an online JavaScript performance benchmark test runner & jsperf.com mirror. It is a complete rewrite in homage to the once excellent jsperf.com now with hopefully a more modern & maintainable codebase.
jsperf.com URLs are mirrored at the same path, e.g:
https://jsperf.com/negative-modulo/2
Can be accessed at:
https://jsperf.app/negative-modulo/2
Is it faster to use the native forEach or just loop with for?
Inspired by Adrian Sutton's tests at: http://www.symphonious.net/2010/10/09/javascript-performance-for-vs-foreach/
This one adds random floating point numbers to see if the loop overhead is significant at all in the face of standard work.
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1/jquery.min.js">
</script>var i,
value,
length,
values = [],
sum = 0,
context = values;
for (i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
values[i] = Math.random();
}
function add(val) {
sum += val;
}
if (!Array.prototype.forEach) {
Array.prototype.forEach = function (fun /*, thisp*/) {
var len = this.length >>> 0;
if (typeof fun != "function") {
throw new TypeError();
}
var thisp = arguments[1];
for (var i = 0; i < len; i++) {
if (i in this) {
fun.call(thisp, this[i], i, this);
}
}
};
}
i = 0;
value = 0;
length = 0;
values = [];
sum = 0;
Ready to run.
| Test | Ops/sec | |
|---|---|---|
| forEach | | ready |
| for loop, inversed | | ready |
| for loop, cached length | | ready |
| for loop, cached length (without var) | | ready |
| for loop, cached length, callback | | ready |
| for loop, cached length, callback.call | | ready |
| $.each | | ready |
| for ... in | | ready |
| for loop, reverse, decrement condition | | ready |
| for loop, reverse, pre-decrement | | ready |
| for loop, assignment condition | | ready |
| for loop, assignment condition, reversed | | ready |
| for loop, assignment condition, callback | | ready |
| for loop, assignment condition, callback.call | | ready |
You can edit these tests or add more tests to this page by appending /edit to the URL.