diff --git a/compiler/rustc_abi/src/tests.rs b/compiler/rustc_abi/src/tests.rs
index 1ec6a35401068..c9cbd355c5186 100644
--- a/compiler/rustc_abi/src/tests.rs
+++ b/compiler/rustc_abi/src/tests.rs
@@ -52,6 +52,12 @@ fn wrapping_range_smallest_range_containing() {
     check([200, 50, 60], 1, 200, 60);
     check([200, 50, 125], 1, 50, 200);
 
+    // A wraparound range is only potentially interesting when
+    // the non-wraparound range covers over half the range.
+    check([0, 127], 1, 0, 127); // `0..=127` is smaller
+    check([0, 128], 1, 0, 128); // both are the same size
+    check([0, 129], 1, 129, 0); // `(..=0) | (129..)` is smaller
+
     // The mem::Alignment case
     check((0..64).map(|n| 1 << n), 8, 1, i64::MIN.cast_unsigned().into());
 
@@ -66,6 +72,9 @@ fn wrapping_range_smallest_range_containing() {
     // `(..=32) | (96..)`, `(..=96) | (160..)`, `(..=160) | (224..)`, and `32..=224`.
     // We pick the last one as the only one that doesn't contain zero.
     check([0xA0, 0xE0, 0x20, 0x60], 1, 0x20, 0xE0);
+
+    // Wraparound can still be needed even in `max - min < values.len()`.
+    check(std::iter::chain([50; 100], [200; 100]), 1, 200, 50);
 }
 
 #[test]
diff --git a/compiler/rustc_abi/src/wrapping_range.rs b/compiler/rustc_abi/src/wrapping_range.rs
index 06e1388931988..1e97224899dcf 100644
--- a/compiler/rustc_abi/src/wrapping_range.rs
+++ b/compiler/rustc_abi/src/wrapping_range.rs
@@ -171,20 +171,36 @@ impl WrappingRange {
         size: Size,
     ) -> Option<Self> {
         let mut values: Vec<_> = values.into_iter().collect();
-        values.sort_unstable();
 
-        // The simple answer is the non-wraparound range `min..=max`.
-        let obvious_range = WrappingRange { start: *values.first()?, end: *values.last()? };
+        let (min, max) = values
+            .iter()
+            .copied()
+            .map(|x| (x, x))
+            .reduce(|a, b| (u128::min(a.0, b.0), u128::max(a.1, b.1)))?;
+
+        // Just checking the max is enough to ensure that everything is in-range.
+        assert!(max <= size.unsigned_int_max(), "Value {max:?} is too big for {size:?}");
 
-        // Having sorted the inputs, one test is enough to double-check they all fit in `size`.
-        let max_input = obvious_range.end;
-        assert!(
-            max_input <= size.unsigned_int_max(),
-            "Value {max_input:?} is too big for {size:?}",
-        );
+        // The simple answer is the non-wraparound range `min..=max`.
+        let obvious_range = WrappingRange { start: min, end: max };
+
+        // It's very common that the input was only small non-negative integers and the
+        // obvious range turns out to be the best we can do.
+        // Every possible wraparound range must include at least `(...=min) | (max..)`,
+        // so if what we found already is at least that good, just use it.
+        //     WR(min, max).width() ≤ WR(max, min).width()
+        //         (max - min) % 2ⁿ ≤ (min - max) % 2ⁿ
+        //                max - min ≤ min - max + 2ⁿ
+        //            2×(max - min) ≤ 2ⁿ
+        //                max - min ≤ 2ⁿ⁻¹
+        let half_range = 1 << (size.bits() - 1);
+        if max - min <= half_range {
+            return Some(obvious_range);
+        }
 
         // But every `[.., end, start, ..]` is also a potential candidate for a wraparound
         // range `(..=end) | (start..)`, so long as `start` and `end` aren't duplicates.
+        values.sort_unstable();
         let wraparound_ranges = values
             .array_windows::<2>()
             .filter_map(|&[end, start]| (start != end).then_some(WrappingRange { start, end }));