PHP Benchmarks

Performance comparison of PHP code alternatives.

Test: === null vs. is_null

No Description

Run this test again Return to test menu

Result: Discarded

The test labeled "=== null" was the faster by 0.0525 seconds, (5.923% faster)

=== null 100%
is_null() 94.077%

The === null test took 0.8334 seconds.
The is_null() test took 0.8859 seconds.

Nitty-Gritty

Each test case ran 20 random code order iterations consisting of 215,479 loops for a total of 4,309,580 runs.

  • Line execution difference (0.000012) milliseconds.
  • Avg difference (2.624) milliseconds per 215,479 loops.
  • Total difference 52.47 milliseconds for 4,309,580 loops

The iteration variablity for Code 1 was (0.8396) milliseconds and Code 2 was (1.9002) milliseconds. The lower and the closer together there values are the more accurate the results are.

Code

The first test, "=== null", was:

for ($j = 0; $j < 100; $j++)
{
	$GLOBALS['dummy3'] = $GLOBALS['dummy1'] === null;
	$GLOBALS['dummy3'] += $GLOBALS['dummy2'] === null;
}

The second test, "is_null()", was:

for ($j = 0; $j < 100; $j++)
{
	$GLOBALS['dummy3'] = is_null($GLOBALS['dummy1']);
	$GLOBALS['dummy3'] += is_null($GLOBALS['dummy2']);
}

Running: Linux (x86_64:1 GB) PHP (7.2.15-1+ubuntu16.04.1+deb.sury.org+1)