-
⛷ @hackancubaAuthor OwnerFor an Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6820HQ CPU @ 2.70GHz I got: option 1 is the fastest, followed by options 2 and 8 for regular to big payloads, but for very big payloads then option 2 turns the fastest. However, since this lib is primarily oriented to sign data for cookies, option 1 would be the optimal one (if correct!).
--- Payload size: 100 option_1 1.88 µs ± 9.82 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 1000000 loops each) option_2 2.35 µs ± 46.4 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_3 3.84 µs ± 26.5 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_4 4.81 µs ± 33.5 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_5 4.32 µs ± 17.7 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_6 4.04 µs ± 28.3 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_7 3.7 µs ± 27.8 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_8 2.36 µs ± 31.8 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) Option | Best Abs Time | Measure | Comparison -------------------- | ------------- | ------- | --------------------------- option_1 | 1.86 us | √ | baseline option_2 | 2.3 us | ⚠ | 23% (slower than baseline) option_3 | 3.8 us | √ | 104% (slower than baseline) option_4 | 4.75 us | √ | 155% (slower than baseline) option_5 | 4.29 us | √ | 130% (slower than baseline) option_6 | 4 us | √ | 115% (slower than baseline) option_7 | 3.67 us | √ | 97% (slower than baseline) option_8 | 2.34 us | √ | 25% (slower than baseline) --- Payload size: 10000 option_1 6.33 µs ± 41.2 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_2 6.43 µs ± 34 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_3 8.04 µs ± 26.9 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_4 9.11 µs ± 73.6 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_5 8.59 µs ± 40.1 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_6 8.28 µs ± 45.2 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_7 8.02 µs ± 33.7 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_8 6.63 µs ± 41 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) Option | Best Abs Time | Measure | Comparison -------------------- | ------------- | ------- | --------------------------- option_1 | 6.29 us | √ | baseline option_2 | 6.37 us | √ | 1% (slower than baseline) option_3 | 8 us | √ | 27% (slower than baseline) option_4 | 9 us | √ | 43% (slower than baseline) option_5 | 8.53 us | √ | 35% (slower than baseline) option_6 | 8.19 us | √ | 30% (slower than baseline) option_7 | 7.97 us | √ | 26% (slower than baseline) option_8 | 6.58 us | √ | 4% (slower than baseline) --- Payload size: 15000 option_1 10.1 µs ± 190 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_2 9.54 µs ± 78.3 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_3 11.2 µs ± 35.5 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_4 12.1 µs ± 49.6 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_5 11.6 µs ± 114 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_6 11.3 µs ± 25.5 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_7 11.1 µs ± 66 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) option_8 9.71 µs ± 107 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 100000 loops each) Option | Best Abs Time | Measure | Comparison -------------------- | ------------- | ------- | --------------------------- option_1 | 9.77 us | ⚠ | baseline option_2 | 9.42 us | √ | -4% (faster than baseline) option_3 | 11.1 us | √ | 13% (slower than baseline) option_4 | 12.1 us | √ | 23% (slower than baseline) option_5 | 11.5 us | √ | 17% (slower than baseline) option_6 | 11.3 us | √ | 15% (slower than baseline) option_7 | 11.1 us | √ | 13% (slower than baseline) option_8 | 9.6 us | √ | -2% (faster than baseline) --- Payload size: 100000 option_1 34.1 µs ± 630 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 10000 loops each) option_2 31.2 µs ± 669 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 10000 loops each) option_3 33.4 µs ± 413 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 10000 loops each) option_4 34 µs ± 365 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 10000 loops each) option_5 33.7 µs ± 384 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 10000 loops each) option_6 33.2 µs ± 331 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 10000 loops each) option_7 33.1 µs ± 479 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 10000 loops each) option_8 31.3 µs ± 203 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 10 runs, 10000 loops each) Option | Best Abs Time | Measure | Comparison -------------------- | ------------- | ------- | --------------------------- option_1 | 33.6 us | ⚠ | baseline option_2 | 30.6 us | ⚠ | -9% (faster than baseline) option_3 | 33.1 us | √ | -2% (faster than baseline) option_4 | 33.6 us | √ | 0% option_5 | 33 us | √ | -2% (faster than baseline) option_6 | 32.7 us | √ | -3% (faster than baseline) option_7 | 32.3 us | √ | -4% (faster than baseline) option_8 | 31 us | √ | -8% (faster than baseline)
Edited by HacKan
Please register or sign in to comment