PHPBench.com was constructed as a way to open people's eyes to the fact that not every PHP code snippet will run at the same speed. You may be surprised at the results that this page generates, but that is ok. This page was also created so that you would be able to find discovery in these statistics and then maybe re-run these tests in your own server environment to play around with this idea yourself, by using the code examples (these code examples are automatically generated and as the code in my .php files change, so do they).

NOTE: You must keep in mind to refresh this page a few times to "catch" the right result. The numbers change sometimes drastically during each refresh. I assume that this is because of PHP's memory garbage collector that drops in randomly and also other processes that run on this machine have an influence.

NOTE: The microtime() method for testing out these tests has only been utilised for simplicities sake. If anything more advanced was used, those whom are just starting out on their PHP journey would have difficulties understanding.

Variable Type CheckingisSet() vs. empty() vs. is_array()

What is the performance of isSet() and empty(). Call 2'000x

+ 109 %

isSet() with var that was set

Total time: 175 µsview code

+ 111 %

empty() with var that was set

Total time: 179 µsview code

+ 100 %

isSet() with var that was *not* set

Total time: 162 µsview code

+ 100 %

empty() with var that was *not* set

Total time: 161 µsview code

+ 104 %

isSet() with array-var that was set

Total time: 168 µsview code

+ 105 %

empty() with array-var that was set

Total time: 169 µsview code

+ 101 %

isSet() with array-var that was *not* set

Total time: 163 µsview code

+ 104 %

empty() with array-var that was *not* set

Total time: 168 µsview code

+ 496 %

is_array() of an array

Total time: 799 µsview code

+ 505 %

is_array() of a string

Total time: 814 µsview code

+ 1128 %

is_array() of a non set value

Total time: 1818 µsview code

+ 1153 %

isSet() AND is_array() of a non set value

Total time: 1858 µsview code

Conclusion:

isSet() and empty() are identical. So alway check if val is set at all befor using type-checking. E.g. if (isSet($foo) AND is_array($foo))

Read Loop:foreach() vs. for() vs. while(list() = each())

What is the best way to loop a hash array?

Given is a Hash array with 100 elements, 24byte key and 10k data per entry

+ 100 %

foreach($aHash as $val);

Total time: 12 µsview code

+ 1098 %

while(list(,$val) = each($aHash));

Total time: 131 µsview code

+ 144 %

foreach($aHash as $key => $val);

Total time: 17 µsview code

+ 1140 %

while(list($key,$val) = each($aHash));

Total time: 136 µsview code

+ 384 %

foreach($aHash as $key=>$val) $tmp[] = $aHash[$key];

Total time: 46 µsview code

+ 1226 %

while(list($key) = each($aHash)) $tmp[] = $aHash[$key];

Total time: 146 µsview code

+ 620 %

Get key-/ value-array: foreach($aHash as $key[]=>$val[]);

Total time: 74 µsview code

+ 428 %

Get key-/ value-array: array_keys() / array_values()

Total time: 51 µsview code

+ 562 %

$key = array_keys($aHash);
$size = sizeOf($key);
for ($i=0; $i<$size; $i++) $tmp[] = $aHash[$key[$i]];

Total time: 67 µsview code

Conclusion:

In all cases I've found that the foreach loop is substantially faster than both the while() and for() loop procedures. One thing to note is that when using an entire loop from the start it's extremely good to use the reset() function in all examples

Given that the previous version of the tests have been very controvercial and incorrect, I must appologise for forgetting to implement the reset() function to allow the while() loops to start from the beginning instead of the end. Thanks to Anthony Bush for spotting this out.

Control Structuresswitch/case/default vs. if/elseif/else

Is a there a difference between switch and if structures?. Call 1'000x

+ 136 %

if and elseif (using ==)

Total time: 169 µsview code

+ 132 %

if, elseif and else (using ==)

Total time: 164 µsview code

+ 102 %

if and elseif (using ===)

Total time: 126 µsview code

+ 100 %

if, elseif and else (using ===)

Total time: 124 µsview code

+ 143 %

switch / case

Total time: 177 µsview code

+ 174 %

switch / case / default

Total time: 216 µsview code

Conclusion:

Using a switch/case or if/elseif is almost the same. Note that the test is unsing === (is exactly equal to) and is slightly faster then using == (is equal to).

Using the &-ref-operator...as a so called "alias"

Is a good idea to use the &-ref-operator to substitute (or alias) a complex mutidim-array? . Call 1'000x

E.g. $person = &$aHach["country"]["zip"]["street"]["number"]["name"]

+ 112 %

$alias = $aSingleDimArray[$i]

Total time: 610 µsview code

+ 100 %

$alias = &$aSingleDimArray[$i]

Total time: 546 µsview code

+ 135 %

$alias = $aMultiDimArray[$i]["aaaaa"]["aaaaaaaaaa"]

Total time: 735 µsview code

+ 369 %

$alias = &$aMultiDimArray[$i]["aaaaa"]["aaaaaaaaaa"]

Total time: 2015 µsview code

+ 158 %

$alias = veryMultiDimArray[$i]["a"]["aa"]["aaa"]["aaaa"]["aaaaa"]

Total time: 860 µsview code

+ 755 %

$alias = &$veryMultiDimArray[$i]["a"]["aa"]["aaa"]["aaaa"]["aaaaa"]

Total time: 4124 µsview code

Conclusion:

Whilst only using a one dimensional array, it's actually faster to use an alias, but anything larger will result in a performance drop.

Using the =&-ref-operator$obj = new SomeClass() vs. $obj =& new SomeClass()

Is a good idea to use the =&-ref-operator when creating a new object? Call 1'000x

+ 100 %

$obj = new SomeClass();

Total time: 426 µsview code

+ 117 %

$obj =& new SomeClass();

Total time: 499 µsview code

Conclusion:

There seams to be no difference in performance.

Modify Loop: foreach() vs. for vs. while(list() = each())

What would happen if we alter the reading loop test to test the results of a loop created to simply alter the data in each of the values in the array?

Given again is a Hash array with 100 elements, 24byte key and 10k data per entry.

+ 239 %

foreach($aHash as $key=>$val) $aHash[$key] .= "a";

Total time: 134 µsview code

+ 254 %

while(list($key) = each($aHash)) $aHash[$key] .= "a";

Total time: 142 µsview code

+ 100 %

$key = array_keys($aHash);
$size = sizeOf($key);
for ($i=0; $i<$size; $i++) $aHash[$key[$i]] .= "a";

Total time: 56 µsview code

Conclusion:

Proof in this example shows how functionally murderous the foreach() loop can be.

Counting LoopsFor vs. While

Is there an actual difference between counting up between the for loop and the while loop?

+ 112 %

for($i = 0; $i < 1000000; ++$i);

Total time: 64220 µsview code

+ 100 %

$i = 0; while($i < 1000000) ++$i;

Total time: 57093 µsview code

Conclusion:

Well there you have it, the while loop 90% of the time is indeed slightly faster

Using the =&-ref-operator$obj = $someClass->f() vs. $obj =& $someClass->f()

Is a good idea to use the =&-ref-operator when calling a function in an object? Call 1'000x

+ 100 %

$obj = $someClass->f();

Total time: 504 µsview code

+ 235 %

$obj =& $someClass->f();

Total time: 1186 µsview code

Conclusion:

Unless your extremely worried about how much RAM your using, leaving the &-ref-operator out seems like the slightly faster option.

Counting LoopsFor-loop test

Is it worth the effort to calculate the length of the loop in advance?

e.g. "for ($i=0; $i<$size; $i++)" instead of "for ($i=0; $i<sizeOf($x); $i++)"

A loop with 1000 keys with 1 byte values are given.

+ 106 %

With pre calc - count()

Total time: 186 µsview code

+ 54236 %

Without pre calc - count()

Total time: 95430 µsview code

+ 100 %

With pre calc - sizeof()

Total time: 176 µsview code

+ 53610 %

Without pre calc - sizeof()

Total time: 94328 µsview code

Conclusion:

Unsurprising results... this is one of the easiest things to implement in any application and is the widest agreed upon benchmarking item within the online PHP community. The results basically speak for themselves.

Quote Typesdouble (") vs. single (') quotes

Is a there a difference in using double (") and single (') quotes for strings. Call 1'000x

+ 112 %

single (') quotes. Just an empty string: $tmp[] = '';

Total time: 285 µsview code

+ 101 %

double (") quotes. Just an empty string: $tmp[] = "";

Total time: 257 µsview code

+ 100 %

single (') quotes. 20 bytes Text : $tmp[] = 'aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa';

Total time: 255 µsview code

+ 102 %

double (") quotes. 20 bytes Text : $tmp[] = "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa";

Total time: 259 µsview code

+ 102 %

single (') quotes. 20 bytes Text and 3x a $ : $tmp[] = 'aa $ aaaa $ aaaa $ a';

Total time: 259 µsview code

+ 100 %

double (") quotes. 20 bytes Text and 3x a $ : $tmp[] = "aa $ aaaa $ aaaa $ a";

Total time: 254 µsview code

+ 103 %

double (") quotes. 20 bytes Text and 3x a \$ : $tmp[] = "aa \$ aaaa \$ aaaa \$ a";

Total time: 262 µsview code

Conclusion:

In today's versions of PHP it looks like this argument has been satisfied on both sides of the line. Lets all join together in harmony in this one!

String Outputecho vs. print

Is a there a difference between what option you use to output your content?. Called within Output Buffering 1'000x

+ 100 %

echo ''

Total time: 101 µsview code

+ 102 %

print ''

Total time: 103 µsview code

+ 142 %

echo 'aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa'

Total time: 144 µsview code

+ 161 %

print 'aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa'

Total time: 163 µsview code

+ 398 %

echo 'aaaaaaa'.'aaaaaaa'.'aaaaaaa'.'aaaaaaa'

Total time: 402 µsview code

+ 399 %

echo 'aaaaaaa','aaaaaaa','aaaaaaa','aaaaaaa'

Total time: 403 µsview code

+ 442 %

print 'aaaaaaa'.'aaaaaaa'.'aaaaaaa'.'aaaaaaa'

Total time: 447 µsview code

+ 453 %

$a = 'aaaaaaa';
echo 'aaaaaaa'.$a.'aaaaaaa'.$a

Total time: 458 µsview code

+ 476 %

$a = 'aaaaaaa';
echo 'aaaaaaa',$a,'aaaaaaa',$a

Total time: 481 µsview code

+ 480 %

$a = 'aaaaaaa';
print 'aaaaaaa'.$a.'aaaaaaa'.$a

Total time: 485 µsview code

+ 446 %

$a = 'aaaaaaa';
echo $a.$a.$a.$a

Total time: 451 µsview code

+ 440 %

$a = 'aaaaaaa';
echo $a,$a,$a,$a

Total time: 445 µsview code

+ 501 %

$a = 'aaaaaaa';
print $a,$a,$a,$a

Total time: 507 µsview code

Conclusion:

In reality the echo and print functions serve the exact purpose and therefore in the backend the exact same code applies. The one small thing to notice is that when using a comma to separate items whilst using the echo function, items run slightly faster.