Benchmark: msgpack vs json - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script crossorigin src="https://unpkg.com/@msgpack/msgpack"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var data = {"glossary":{"title":"example glossary","GlossDiv":{"title":"S","GlossList":{"GlossEntry":{"ID":"SGML","SortAs":"SGML","GlossTerm":"Standard Generalized Markup Language","Acronym":"SGML","Abbrev":"ISO 8879:1986","GlossDef":{"para":"A meta-markup language, used to create markup languages such as DocBook.","GlossSeeAlso":["GML","XML"]},"GlossSee":"markup"}}}}};
var buf = JSON.stringify(data);

Tests:

MessagePack.encode
var result = MessagePack.decode(buf);
JSON.parse
var result = JSON.parse(buf);

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 runs

JSON.parse

796K/s

MessagePack.encode

0/s

View exact numbers

✓ JSON.parse: 796,427 ops/sec
• MessagePack.encode: 0 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
MessagePack.encode
JSON.parse

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/148.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/148.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 148 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

JSON.parse

2.0M/s

MessagePack.encode

0/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ JSON.parse	1,965,252 Ops/sec
MessagePack.encode	0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**What is being tested?**

The website MeasureThat.net provides a microbenchmarking platform where users can create and run JavaScript benchmarks. In this case, two individual test cases are comparing the performance of MessagePack encode and JSON parse.

**Options compared:**

1.  **MessagePack Encode**: MessagePack is a binary serialization format that is similar to JSON but more compact. The `MessagePack.encode()` function is used to serialize data into a MessagePack buffer.
2.  **JSON Parse**: JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) is a lightweight data interchange format. The `JSON.parse()` function is used to parse a JSON string into a JavaScript object.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1.  **MessagePack Encode**:
    *   Pros:
        *   MessagePack is more compact than JSON, which can result in smaller payload sizes.
        *   MessagePack is designed for high-performance applications, making it suitable for real-time data processing.
    *   Cons:
        *   MessagePack has a steeper learning curve due to its binary format, which may require additional development effort.
        *   Not all JSON parsers support MessagePack natively, requiring additional workarounds.

2.  **JSON Parse**:
    *   Pros:
        *   JSON is widely supported and understood by most developers, making it an easier choice for many use cases.
        *   No additional development effort required, as JSON is a standard data format in JavaScript.
    *   Cons:
        *   JSON payloads are typically larger than MessagePack, resulting in slower transmission speeds.

**Library:**

*   **MessagePack:** The @msgpack/msgpack library is used in the benchmark. This library provides functions for encoding and decoding MessagePack buffers.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

None mentioned directly; however, this benchmark assumes a basic understanding of JavaScript's string manipulation methods like `JSON.stringify()` and `decode()`, as well as its array handling methods like `[ ]`.

**Other alternatives:**

*   **BSON (Binary Serialized Object Notation):** A binary data format similar to MessagePack but primarily designed for MongoDB. While not directly compared in this benchmark, it's another compact serialization format that could be considered.
*   **XML:** Another widely used data interchange format that can also be used for data exchange. However, due to its verbose nature (comparing to JSON and MessagePack), XML might not be the most efficient choice here.

In summary, this benchmark tests the performance of MessagePack encode against JSON parse. The results will help users compare the execution speeds of these two serialization formats in JavaScript applications.

msgpack vs json (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `MessagePack.encode vs JSON.parse`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

MessagePack.encode

JSON.parse

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

msgpack vs json (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: MessagePack.encode vs JSON.parse

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

MessagePack.encode

JSON.parse

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `MessagePack.encode vs JSON.parse`