Benchmark: Markdown Performance Comparison 13

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://unpkg.com/marked@1.1.0/marked.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://unpkg.com/commonmark@0.29.1/dist/commonmark.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://unpkg.com/markdown-it@11.0.0/dist/markdown-it.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://unpkg.com/remarkable@2.0.1/dist/remarkable.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://unpkg.com/micromarkdown@0.3.0/dist/micromarkdown.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://unpkg.com/snarkdown@1.2.2/dist/snarkdown.umd.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var conv = {
  marked: marked,
  cm: new commonmark.HtmlRenderer(),
  mdit: markdownit({ html: true }),
  remarkable: new remarkable.Remarkable(),
  micromarkdown: window.micromarkdown,
  snarkdown: window.snarkdown,
};

var pars = {
  cm: new commonmark.Parser()
};

var md = "# The Static, Static Blog Generator\n\n### May 17th, 2014\n\nWe all like publishing our thoughts online - but why is it such a bother to run a CMS?\n\nManaging databases, `updating` software, and keeping track of our *content* often cuts into the most important activity: *expressing ourselves*.\n\nThe web makes it really __easy to share__ our thoughts with millions of __individuals__ from around the world.";

Tests:

Marked
conv.marked(md);
CommonMark
conv.cm.render(pars.cm.parse(md));
Markdown-it
conv.mdit.render(md);
Remarkable
conv.remarkable.render(md);
Micromarkdown
conv.micromarkdown.parse(md);
Snarkdown
conv.snarkdown(md);

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 40 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 30 runs

Remarkable

166K/s

Micromarkdown

153K/s

Snarkdown

136K/s

CommonMark

133K/s

Markdown-it

126K/s

Marked

63K/s

Fastest: Remarkable (2.7x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Remarkable: 166,075 ops/sec
• Micromarkdown: 153,139 ops/sec
• Snarkdown: 135,912 ops/sec
• CommonMark: 132,757 ops/sec
• Markdown-it: 125,615 ops/sec
• Marked: 62,501 ops/sec

Firefox 5 runs

Micromarkdown

138K/s

Remarkable

89K/s

Snarkdown

84K/s

CommonMark

68K/s

Markdown-it

62K/s

Marked

56K/s

Fastest: Micromarkdown (2.5x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Micromarkdown: 137,853 ops/sec
• Remarkable: 88,655 ops/sec
• Snarkdown: 84,365 ops/sec
• CommonMark: 67,923 ops/sec
• Markdown-it: 62,024 ops/sec
• Marked: 55,775 ops/sec

Mobile Results:

Chrome 5 runs

Micromarkdown

36K/s

Remarkable

32K/s

Snarkdown

30K/s

Markdown-it

23K/s

CommonMark

22K/s

Marked

12K/s

Fastest: Micromarkdown (3.1x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Micromarkdown: 36,047 ops/sec
• Remarkable: 32,320 ops/sec
• Snarkdown: 29,814 ops/sec
• Markdown-it: 23,261 ops/sec
• CommonMark: 21,837 ops/sec
• Marked: 11,702 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
Marked
CommonMark
Markdown-it
Remarkable
Micromarkdown
Snarkdown

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/18.5 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 18 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Remarkable

189K/s

Markdown-it

131K/s

CommonMark

118K/s

Micromarkdown

63K/s

Marked

18K/s

Snarkdown

9K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Remarkable	188,996 Ops/sec
Markdown-it	130,944 Ops/sec
CommonMark	118,470 Ops/sec
Micromarkdown	63,371 Ops/sec
Marked	18,429 Ops/sec
Snarkdown	8,843 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 to understand what is being tested, the options being compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition:**
The benchmark measures the performance of different JavaScript Markdown implementations (Marked, CommonMark, Markdown-it, Remarkable, Micromarkdown, and Snarkdown) in rendering a given Markdown text (`md`).

**Options Being Compared:**

1. **Marked**: A lightweight, header-only implementation of Markdown parsing.
2. **CommonMark**: An open-source implementation of Markdown parsing that aims to be more accurate than other Markdown parsers.
3. **Markdown-it**: A popular JavaScript library for parsing and rendering Markdown text.
4. **Remarkable**: A modern, feature-rich Markdown parser with a focus on performance and ease of use.
5. **Micromarkdown**: A small, header-only library for parsing Markdown text.
6. **Snarkdown**: A JavaScript library for parsing and rendering Markdown text.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Marked**: Lightweight, easy to use, but may sacrifice accuracy or features compared to other implementations. Pros: Small size, fast execution times.
* **CommonMark**: More accurate and feature-rich than Marked, but larger in size. Cons: May be slower due to its complexity.
* **Markdown-it**: Popular and widely used, with a large community of contributors. Pros: Feature-rich, well-maintained, and fast execution times. Cons: Larger size compared to Micromarkdown.
* **Remarkable**: Modern implementation with a focus on performance and ease of use. Pros: Fast execution times, modern features like syntax highlighting. Cons: May be more complex than other implementations.
* **Micromarkdown**: Small, lightweight, and easy to use, but may sacrifice accuracy or features compared to other implementations. Pros: Fast execution times, small size.
* **Snarkdown**: Feature-rich and well-maintained, with a focus on performance. Cons: Larger size compared to Micromarkdown.

**Library-Specific Notes:**

* **CommonMark**: The CommonMark specification is an open-standard for Markdown parsing. This implementation adheres to the specification, ensuring accurate rendering of Markdown text.
* **Markdown-it**: A popular JavaScript library that provides a wide range of features and plugins. Its performance and accuracy are among the best in this benchmark.

**Special JS Features/Syntax:**

None mentioned in the provided code snippets. However, some libraries (like Remarkable) may utilize modern JavaScript features like ES6 syntax or async/await for better performance.

**Other Alternatives:**
There are other Markdown parsers available, such as:

* **Showcase**: A fast and lightweight Markdown parser with a focus on performance.
* **js-markdown**: A simple and easy-to-use Markdown parser that is well-suited for small projects.
* **markdown-it-extensions**: An extension of the popular Markdown-it library, providing additional features like syntax highlighting.

Keep in mind that each implementation has its strengths and weaknesses, and the choice of which one to use depends on specific project requirements and constraints.

Markdown Performance Comparison 13 (version: 0)

A performance comparison of leading Javascript Markdown implementations.

Comparing performance of: `Marked vs CommonMark vs Markdown-it vs Remarkable vs Micromarkdown vs Snarkdown`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Marked

CommonMark

Markdown-it

Remarkable

Micromarkdown

Snarkdown

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 40 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 30 runs

Firefox 5 runs

Mobile 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):

Markdown Performance Comparison 13 (version: 0)

A performance comparison of leading Javascript Markdown implementations.

Comparing performance of: Marked vs CommonMark vs Markdown-it vs Remarkable vs Micromarkdown vs Snarkdown

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Marked

CommonMark

Markdown-it

Remarkable

Micromarkdown

Snarkdown

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 40 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 30 runs

Firefox 5 runs

Mobile 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: `Marked vs CommonMark vs Markdown-it vs Remarkable vs Micromarkdown vs Snarkdown`