Ecosyste.ms: Awesome

An open API service indexing awesome lists of open source software.

Awesome Lists | Featured Topics | Projects

https://github.com/makschernetskyi/python_vs_javascript

a short study to compare performance of python and javascript
https://github.com/makschernetskyi/python_vs_javascript

Last synced: 17 days ago
JSON representation

a short study to compare performance of python and javascript

Awesome Lists containing this project

README 

        
# Performance Comparison: JavaScript vs Python



This study compares the performance of **JavaScript (Node.js v20.17.0)** and **Python (3.12.6)** across four tasks: Fibonacci calculation (recursive), file reading (Shakespeare's works, ~5.4MB), JSON parsing, and matrix multiplication. Each task was executed five times, and the results were recorded for analysis.



**Note**: This study uses plain JavaScript and Python, without any external libraries (e.g., NumPy for Python or math.js for JavaScript). This ensures a fair comparison of pure language capabilities without leveraging C-based optimizations.



---



## 1. Hypothesis



It is hypothesized that Python is overperformed by JavaScript in various tasks.



---



## 2. Tasks and Benchmarks



### Task 1: Fibonacci Calculation (Recursive)

A recursive Fibonacci function was used to calculate the 30th Fibonacci number. Recursive implementations highlight raw CPU-bound performance.



| Language      | Try 1    | Try 2    | Try 3    | Try 4    | Try 5    | Average   |

|---------------|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|-----------|

| **JavaScript**| 21.978ms | 21.978ms | 20.1ms   | 19.226ms | 19.477ms | 20.55ms   |

| **Python**    | 214.126ms| 207.010ms| 214.091ms| 220.466ms| 211.350ms| 213.81ms  |



**Observation**: JavaScript was approximately **10 times faster** than Python in this CPU-bound task.



---



### Task 2: File Reading

Both languages read Shakespeare's complete works (5.4MB text file). This task evaluates I/O performance.



| Language      | Try 1    | Try 2    | Try 3    | Try 4    | Try 5    | Average   |

|---------------|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|-----------|

| **JavaScript**| 9.312ms  | 9.16ms   | 9.278ms  | 9.701ms  | 8.824ms  | 9.255ms   |

| **Python**    | 15.539ms | 19.755ms | 21.368ms | 13.361ms | 15.431ms | 17.09ms   |



**Observation**: JavaScript was approximately **1.8 times faster** than Python in file I/O operations.



---



### Task 3: JSON Parsing

A large JSON object (~100,000 key-value pairs) was parsed in both languages. This task evaluates string processing and parsing efficiency.



| Language      | Try 1    | Try 2    | Try 3    | Try 4    | Try 5    | Average   |

|---------------|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|-----------|

| **JavaScript**| 13.234ms | 13.188ms | 13.284ms | 13.241ms | 13.424ms | 13.27ms   |

| **Python**    | 20.040ms | 16.490ms | 15.250ms | 18.780ms | 20.030ms | 18.12ms   |



**Observation**: JavaScript was approximately **1.4 times faster** than Python in JSON parsing.



---



### Task 4: Matrix Multiplication

Matrix multiplication was performed on two square matrices of size \(128 \times 128\). This task evaluates raw computational performance for numerical operations.



| Language      | Try 1    | Try 2    | Try 3    | Try 4    | Try 5    | Average   |

|---------------|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|-----------|

| **JavaScript**| 29.671ms | 32.257ms | 28.485ms | 29.445ms | 29.342ms | 29.84ms   |

| **Python**    | 338.45ms | 341.48ms | 337.02ms | 339.54ms | 352.16ms | 341.73ms  |



**Observation**: JavaScript was approximately **11.5 times faster** than Python in matrix multiplication.



---



## 3. Averages Summary



| Task                | JavaScript Average | Python Average | Performance Ratio (JS/Python) |

|---------------------|---------------------|----------------|-------------------------------|

| Fibonacci Calculation | 20.55ms           | 213.81ms       | **~10.4x faster**             |

| File Reading         | 9.255ms           | 17.09ms        | **~1.8x faster**              |

| JSON Parsing         | 13.27ms           | 18.12ms        | **~1.4x faster**              |

| Matrix Multiplication| 29.84ms           | 341.73ms       | **~11.5x faster**             |



---



## 4. Conclusion



1. **Fibonacci Calculation**:

   - JavaScript is significantly faster than Python in CPU-bound tasks, as evidenced by the recursive Fibonacci calculation.



2. **File Reading**:

   - JavaScript outperforms Python in file I/O tasks, handling the text file ~1.8 times faster.



3. **JSON Parsing**:

   - JavaScript maintains its advantage but with a smaller margin. Both implementations performed reasonably well.



4. **Matrix Multiplication**:

   - JavaScript shows an even greater advantage, performing matrix multiplication ~11.5 times faster than Python.



### Overall Findings

JavaScript consistently outperformed Python across all tasks in this study. Python's performance, while reasonable, is limited in raw computational and I/O-heavy tasks when using plain code. For scenarios where performance is critical, JavaScript (Node.js) is the preferred choice.



---



## 5. Environment Details



- **JavaScript**:

  - Node.js version: `v20.17.0`

  - Benchmark script: Pure JavaScript.



- **Python**:

  - Python version: `3.12.6`

  - Benchmark script: Pure Python.