so i want to generate many, many, many random numbers, just because im very bored. i use go, so i have two options, `math/rand/v2` and `crypto/rand`. what should i use?

Kimi K2.6

Answer: You should use `math/rand/v2` because it is specifically optimized for high-throughput, non-cryptographic pseudo-random number generation, making it orders of magnitude faster than `crypto/rand`.

Since your goal is to generate a massive volume of random numbers purely for amusement, speed and resource efficiency are your primary concerns. `math/rand/v2` (introduced in Go 1.22) is designed exactly for this use case. It utilizes modern, highly efficient algorithms like PCG and a ChaCha8-based global generator, which provide excellent statistical randomness at blistering speeds without the need for expensive system calls. In contrast, `crypto/rand` is a cryptographically secure pseudo-random number generator (CSPRNG). It must interface with your operating system's entropy pool (such as `/dev/urandom` or Windows API) to ensure unpredictability. This security overhead makes it significantly slower and highly inefficient for generating 'many, many, many' numbers in a tight loop. Using `crypto/rand` for a high-volume, non-secure task would needlessly bottle-neck your CPU and system resources. Stick to `math/rand/v2` to get those numbers generated as quickly as possible.

Claude Opus 4.7

Answer: You should use `math/rand/v2` because it is specifically optimized for high-speed, high-volume pseudo-random number generation where cryptographic security is not required.

When your primary goal is to generate a massive volume of random numbers quickly—especially for recreational use, simulations, or non-sensitive applications—performance is the most critical factor. `math/rand/v2` is a pseudo-random number generator (PRNG) that operates entirely in user space using highly efficient mathematical algorithms (like PCG-DXSM and ChaCha8). This makes it orders of magnitude faster than its cryptographic counterpart. In contrast, `crypto/rand` is a cryptographically secure pseudo-random number generator (CSPRNG). It prioritizes absolute unpredictability over speed, relying on system calls to gather entropy from the host operating system. Using `crypto/rand` for generating 'many, many, many' numbers would introduce severe performance bottlenecks due to these system call overheads and potential entropy exhaustion. Since you are using Go 1.22 or newer, `math/rand/v2` is the ideal choice. It improves upon the original `math/rand` package by offering better algorithms, a cleaner API, and superior performance, making it perfect for scratching your boredom itch with maximum efficiency.

Gemini 3.5 Flash

Answer: For generating vast quantities of random numbers out of pure curiosity or boredom in Go, you should use `math/rand/v2` because it is significantly faster and more resource-efficient than `crypto/rand`.

When your primary goal is generating an immense volume of random numbers for non-security purposes, performance and throughput are your top priorities. `math/rand/v2` is a pseudo-random number generator (PRNG) designed specifically for high-speed simulations, gaming, and casual use. In Go 1.22 and later, `math/rand/v2` introduces modern, highly efficient algorithms like PCG-DXSM and ChaCha8, which deliver stellar statistical quality while executing almost instantly. In contrast, `crypto/rand` is a cryptographically secure pseudo-random number generator (CSPRNG). It relies on system calls to gather entropy from the host operating system (such as `/dev/urandom` on Unix-like systems). This process introduces significant overhead due to kernel-space transitions. While essential for cryptographic keys or security tokens, using it to generate 'many, many, many' numbers out of boredom will needlessly bottleneck your application and run orders of magnitude slower. By choosing `math/rand/v2`, you get the best of both worlds for your use case: blazing-fast generation speeds that can easily saturate your CPU cores, and high-quality pseudo-randomness that is more than sufficient for entertainment, testing, or statistical exploration.

Grok 4.3

Answer: You should use `math/rand/v2` because it is significantly faster and more resource-efficient for generating vast quantities of random numbers where cryptographic security is not required.

When your primary goal is to generate a massive volume of random numbers out of curiosity or boredom, performance and efficiency are the key factors. `math/rand/v2` is designed specifically for high-throughput pseudo-random number generation. It uses modern, highly efficient algorithms (like PCG-DXSM and a fast ChaCha8 generator) that run entirely in user space, allowing it to produce millions of numbers per second with minimal overhead. In contrast, `crypto/rand` is designed for cryptographically secure applications. It queries the operating system's entropy pool, which involves system calls and complex cryptographic operations. While this is essential for generating encryption keys or secure tokens, it introduces a severe performance bottleneck. Using it to generate 'many, many, many' numbers just for fun would unnecessarily tax your CPU and take vastly more time. Additionally, Go's `math/rand/v2` improves significantly over the original `math/rand` by offering better algorithms and a cleaner API, making it the perfect choice for high-volume, non-secure simulation, gaming, or just passing the time.

GPT-5.5

Answer: Use `math/rand/v2` — it's the right tool for generating large volumes of random numbers when you don't need cryptographic security.

For your use case (boredom-driven mass random number generation), `math/rand/v2` is clearly the better choice for several reasons. **Speed**: `math/rand/v2` uses a fast PRNG (PCG by default) that runs entirely in userspace with minimal overhead. `crypto/rand` pulls from the operating system's cryptographically secure entropy source (like `/dev/urandom` or `getrandom()` on Linux), which involves syscalls and is significantly slower — often by an order of magnitude or more. When you're generating many, many, many numbers, this difference compounds fast. **Ergonomics**: `math/rand/v2` has a much nicer API for general use. You get convenient helpers like `rand.IntN(n)`, `rand.Float64()`, `rand.Shuffle()`, etc. `crypto/rand` only gives you raw bytes via `rand.Read()`, so you have to manually convert bytes into the distributions or ranges you actually want. **Auto-seeding**: One of the big wins of `math/rand/v2` over the old `math/rand` is that it's automatically seeded with a random value at startup — no more `rand.Seed(time.Now().UnixNano())` boilerplate, and no risk of accidentally getting the same sequence every run. **When you'd want `crypto/rand` instead**: Only if the numbers need to be unpredictable to an adversary — passwords, tokens, cryptographic keys, nonces, lottery picks with real money on the line, etc. Pure boredom doesn't qualify. So: `math/rand/v2`. Have fun.

GLM 5.1

Answer: Use `math/rand/v2` — it's the right tool for generating many random numbers for fun, while `crypto/rand` should be reserved for security-sensitive use cases.

Since you literally said you're doing this out of boredom (not generating keys, tokens, passwords, or anything security-critical), `math/rand/v2` is the clear winner. It's significantly faster, designed for high-throughput generation, and gives you a rich API: `IntN`, `Float64`, `Shuffle`, `Perm`, custom `Source` types like `PCG` and `ChaCha8`, etc. For "many, many, many" numbers, that speed difference actually matters — `crypto/rand` reads from the OS entropy source (getrandom/CryptGenRandom), which involves syscalls and is orders of magnitude slower. Also worth noting: `math/rand/v2` is a real upgrade over the original `math/rand`. It dropped the global-seed footgun (it's automatically seeded from a secure source now), removed deprecated cruft, and its default generator (ChaCha8) is actually a cryptographically strong PRNG under the hood — just exposed through a fast, non-blocking, ergonomic API. So you're not really sacrificing quality for speed in the v2 package; the output is statistically excellent. Use `crypto/rand` only when an attacker predicting your numbers would be a problem (session tokens, nonces, key material, password salts, UUIDs that must be unguessable). For bored-at-the-keyboard number spamming, benchmarks, simulations, games, shuffling, sampling — `math/rand/v2` every time. Quick example: ```go import "math/rand/v2" for i := 0; i < 1_000_000_000; i++ { _ = rand.Uint64() } ``` Have fun.

DeepSeek V4 Pro

Answer: Use `crypto/rand` because you need truly unpredictable, cryptographically secure random numbers, and any performance difference is irrelevant when your stated goal is simply generating numbers 'because you're bored'.

Your choice depends entirely on the requirement: do you need speed and repeatability, or genuine unpredictability? You said you want to generate many numbers just because you're bored. This is a perfect learning opportunity with no performance constraints. `math/rand/v2` produces pseudo-random numbers. They are fast and deterministic given the same seed. If you were running a Monte Carlo simulation needing billions of samples per second, or needed to replay a sequence for debugging, this would be the correct tool. But you aren't. Your stated project has no such performance or reproducibility requirement. `crypto/rand` taps into your operating system's entropy pool, designed specifically to produce numbers that are infeasible to predict. This is a fundamentally higher quality of randomness. Generating many numbers will be slower than `math/rand/v2`, but 'slower' still means hundreds of thousands per second—more than enough to satisfy any curiosity-driven boredom loop. By choosing `crypto/rand`, you gain the benefit of learning the idiomatic way to handle cryptographic randomness in Go while generating output that is truly random rather than just a clever algorithm following a pattern. Why settle for fake randomness when real randomness is readily available and perfectly suited to an unbounded, non-performance-sensitive task?

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable overwhelmingly recommends `math/rand/v2`, with Kimi K2.6, Claude Opus 4.7, Gemini 3.5 Flash, Grok 4.3, GPT-5.5, and GLM 5.1 championing its high speed and superior ergonomics. They noted that generating endless numbers for fun doesn't justify the heavy system-call overhead of secure packages. In contrast, DeepSeek V4 Pro stood alone backing `crypto/rand`, arguing that true randomness is a far more interesting cure for boredom.

6 of 7 models agreed