Speed difference in using inline strings vs concatenation in php5?

Viewed 23606

(assume php5) consider

<?php

    $foo = 'some words';

    //case 1
    print "these are $foo";

    //case 2
    print "these are {$foo}";

    //case 3
    print 'these are ' . $foo;
?>

Is there much of a difference between 1 and 2?

If not, what about between 1/2 and 3?

15 Answers

The performance difference has been irrelevant since at least January 2012, and likely earlier:

Single quotes: 0.061846971511841 seconds
Double quotes: 0.061599016189575 seconds

Earlier versions of PHP may have had a difference - I personally prefer single quotes to double quotes, so it was a convenient difference. The conclusion of the article makes an excellent point:

Never trust a statistic you didn’t forge yourself.

(Although the article quotes the phrase, the original quip was likely falsely attributed to Winston Churchill, invented by Joseph Goebbels' propaganda ministry to portray Churchill as a liar:

Ich traue keiner Statistik, die ich nicht selbst gefälscht habe.

This loosely translates to, "I do not trust a statistic that I did not fake myself.")

Well, as with all "What might be faster in real life" questions, you can't beat a real life test.

function timeFunc($function, $runs)
{
  $times = array();

  for ($i = 0; $i < $runs; $i++)
  {
    $time = microtime();
    call_user_func($function);
    $times[$i] = microtime() - $time;
  }

  return array_sum($times) / $runs;
}

function Method1()
{ 
  $foo = 'some words';
  for ($i = 0; $i < 10000; $i++)
    $t = "these are $foo";
}

function Method2()
{
  $foo = 'some words';
  for ($i = 0; $i < 10000; $i++)
    $t = "these are {$foo}";
}

function Method3()
 {
  $foo = 'some words';
  for ($i = 0; $i < 10000; $i++)
    $t = "these are " . $foo;
}

print timeFunc('Method1', 10) . "\n";
print timeFunc('Method2', 10) . "\n";
print timeFunc('Method3', 10) . "\n";

Give it a few runs to page everything in, then...

0.0035568

0.0035388

0.0025394

So, as expected, the interpolation are virtually identical (noise level differences, probably due to the extra characters the interpolation engine needs to handle). Straight up concatenation is about 66% of the speed, which is no great shock. The interpolation parser will look, find nothing to do, then finish with a simple internal string concat. Even if the concat were expensive, the interpolator will still have to do it, after all the work to parse out the variable and trim/copy up the original string.

Updates By Somnath:

I added Method4() to above real time logic.

function Method4()
 {
  $foo = 'some words';
  for ($i = 0; $i < 10000; $i++)
    $t = 'these are ' . $foo;
}

print timeFunc('Method4', 10) . "\n";

Results were:

0.0014739
0.0015574
0.0011955
0.001169

When you are just declaring a string only and no need to parse that string too, then why to confuse PHP debugger to parse. I hope you got my point.

Live benchmarks:

http://phpbench.com/

There is actually a subtle difference when concatenating variables with single vs double quotes.

@Adam's test used

"these are " . $foo

note that the following is even faster:

'these are ' . $foo;

this is due to the fact, that a double quoted "string" gets evaluated, where a single quoted 'string' is just taken as is...

Don't get too caught up on trying to optimize string operations in PHP. Concatenation vs. interpolation is meaningless (in real world performance) if your database queries are poorly written or you aren't using any kind of caching scheme. Write your string operations in such a way that debugging your code later will be easy, the performance differences are negligible.

@uberfuzzy Assuming this is just a question about language minutia, I suppose it's fine. I'm just trying to add to the conversation that comparing performance between single-quote, double-quote and heredoc in real world applications in meaningless when compared to the real performance sinks, such as poor database queries.

I seem to remember that the developer of the forum software, Vanilla replaced all the double quotes in his code with single quotes and noticed a reasonable amount of performance increase.

I can't seem to track down a link to the discussion at the moment though.

Double quotes can be much slower. I read from several places that that it is better to do this

'parse me '.$i.' times'

than

"parse me $i times"

Although I'd say the second one gave you more readable code.

Yes, originally this is about PHP5, however in few months arrive PHP8 and today the best option tested over my PHP 7.4.5 is use PHP - Nowdoc (tested over WIN 10 + Apache and CentOs 7 + Apache):

function Method6(){
    $k1 = 'AAA';
    for($i = 0; $i < 10000; $i ++)$t = <<<'EOF'
K1= 
EOF
.$k1.
<<<'EOF'
K2=
EOF
.$k1;
    }

here the method #5 (using Heredoc to concatenat):

function Method5(){
    $k1 = 'AAA';
    for($i = 0; $i < 10000; $i ++)$t = <<<EOF
K1= $k1
EOF
.<<<EOF
K2=$k1 
EOF;
    }

the methods 1 to 4 is in beginning of this post

In all my tests the "winner" is method #6 (Newdoc), no't very easy to read, but very fast in CPU and ever using the function function timeFunc($function) by @Adam Wright.

I have tested php 7.4 and php 5.4 with following test cases, It was little still confusing to me.

<?php
$start_time = microtime(true);
$result = "";
for ($i = 0; $i < 700000; $i++) {
    $result .= "THE STRING APPENDED IS " . $i;
    // AND $result .= 'THE STRING APPENDED IS ' . $i;
    // AND $result .= "THE STRING APPENDED IS $i";
}
echo $result;
$end_time = microtime(true);
echo "<br><br>";
echo ($end_time - $start_time) . " Seconds";

PHP 7.4 Outputs

 1. "THE STRING APPENDED IS " . $i = 0.16744208335876
 2. 'THE STRING APPENDED IS ' . $i = 0.16724419593811
 3. "THE STRING APPENDED IS $i" = 0.16815495491028

PHP 5.3 Outputs

 1. "THE STRING APPENDED IS " . $i = 0.27664494514465
 2. 'THE STRING APPENDED IS ' . $i = 0.27818703651428
 3. "THE STRING APPENDED IS $i" = 0.28839707374573

I have tested so many times, In php 7.4 it seems to be all 3 test cases got same result many times but still concatenation have little bittle advantage in performance.

Based on @adam-wright answer, I wanted to know if speed difference happens without no concataining / no vars in a string.

== My questions...

  • is $array['key'] call or set faster than $array["key"] !?
  • is $var = "some text"; slower than $var = 'some text'; ?

== My tests with new vars every time to avoid use same memory address :

function getArrDblQuote() { 
    $start1 = microtime(true);
    $array1 = array("key" => "value");
    for ($i = 0; $i < 10000000; $i++)
        $t1 = $array1["key"];
    echo microtime(true) - $start1;
}
function getArrSplQuote() {
    $start2 = microtime(true);
    $array2 = array('key' => 'value');
    for ($j = 0; $j < 10000000; $j++)
        $t2 = $array2['key'];
    echo microtime(true) - $start2;
}

function setArrDblQuote() { 
    $start3 = microtime(true);
    for ($k = 0; $k < 10000000; $k++)
        $array3 = array("key" => "value");
    echo microtime(true) - $start3;
}
function setArrSplQuote() {
    $start4 = microtime(true);
    for ($l = 0; $l < 10000000; $l++)
        $array4 = array('key' => 'value');
    echo microtime(true) - $start4;
}

function setStrDblQuote() { 
    $start5 = microtime(true);
    for ($m = 0; $m < 10000000; $m++)
        $var1 = "value";
    echo microtime(true) - $start5;
}
function setStrSplQuote() {
    $start6 = microtime(true);
    for ($n = 0; $n < 10000000; $n++)
        $var2 = 'value';
    echo microtime(true) - $start6;
}

print getArrDblQuote() . "\n<br>";
print getArrSplQuote() . "\n<br>";
print setArrDblQuote() . "\n<br>";
print setArrSplQuote() . "\n<br>";
print setStrDblQuote() . "\n<br>";
print setStrSplQuote() . "\n<br>";

== My Results :

array get double quote 2.1978828907013

array get single quote 2.0163490772247

array set double quote 1.9173440933228

array get single quote 1.4982950687408

var set double quote 1.485809803009

var set single quote 1.3026781082153

== My conclusion !

So, result is that difference is not very significant. However, on a big project, I think it can make the difference !

Related