Benchmark: Vanilla JS VS JQuery AJAX perfomance (jquery 3.6.0)

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.6.0/jquery.min.js"></script>

Tests:

vanilla js
var r = new XMLHttpRequest(); r.open("POST", "http://vanilla-js.com/path/to/api", true); r.onreadystatechange = function () { if (r.readyState != 4 || r.status != 200) return; alert("Success: " + r.responseText); }; r.send("banana=yellow");
jquery
$.ajax({ type: 'POST', url: "path/to/api", data: "banana=yellow", success: function (data) { alert("Success: " + data); }, });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
vanilla js
jquery

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
vanilla js	43708.3 Ops/sec
jquery	10477.1 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript performance benchmarking on MeasureThat.net.

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test that compares the performance of two approaches: Vanilla JavaScript and jQuery for making an AJAX POST request. Here's a breakdown of what's being tested:

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition consists of two scripts, one for each approach. The script is a self-contained piece of code that simulates an AJAX request.

1. **Vanilla JavaScript**: The script creates an instance of the XMLHttpRequest object, sets up an event listener for the readyState change, and sends a POST request to the specified URL with some sample data.
2. **jQuery**: The script uses jQuery's built-in `ajax` method to make a POST request to the same URL with similar sample data.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, two main options are being compared:

* **Vanilla JavaScript**: This approach relies on the built-in XMLHttpRequest API and its event-driven programming model.
* **jQuery**: This approach uses jQuery's lightweight library to simplify the AJAX request process. jQuery provides a more convenient and easier-to-use API for making AJAX requests.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **Vanilla JavaScript**:
	+ Pros:
		- Low-level control over the underlying HTTP request process.
		- No additional dependencies or library overhead.
		- Can be more efficient, as it avoids the overhead of jQuery's abstraction layer.
	+ Cons:
		- Requires a good understanding of the XMLHttpRequest API and its quirks.
		- May require more code to achieve the same result as jQuery.
* **jQuery**:
	+ Pros:
		- Simplifies the AJAX request process by providing a convenient and easy-to-use API.
		- Reduces the amount of code needed to make an AJAX request.
		- Often used in large-scale web applications, making it a well-known and widely-used library.
	+ Cons:
		- Introduces additional dependencies and overhead compared to using Vanilla JavaScript.
		- May be slower due to the abstraction layer.

**Library: jQuery**

In this benchmark, jQuery is being used as a library to simplify the AJAX request process. jQuery provides a convenient API for making requests, including support for common HTTP methods (GET, POST, PUT, DELETE) and response handling.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the provided code snippets. However, it's worth noting that both approaches rely on modern web technologies like XMLHttpRequest and JSON data format.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches to making AJAX requests, here are a few options:

* **Axios**: A popular Promise-based HTTP client library for JavaScript.
* **Fetch API**: A built-in API for making HTTP requests in modern browsers.
* **ActiveX**: An older API for making COM (Component Object Model) requests, which is not commonly used today.

Keep in mind that the choice of library or approach depends on your specific use case, personal preference, and the requirements of your project.

Related benchmarks:

Vanilla JS VS JQuery AJAX perfomance (jquery 3.6.0) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Vanilla JS vs Jquery

Comparing performance of: vanilla js vs jquery

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

vanilla js

jquery

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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