Benchmark: Markdown Performance Comparison 21

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 = "# Short test\n\nthis is a *short* test, a short test to check how this thing does with a pretty _short_ piece of text.";

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 35 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 29 runs

Remarkable

385K/s

Micromarkdown

363K/s

Snarkdown

302K/s

Markdown-it

272K/s

CommonMark

244K/s

Marked

141K/s

Fastest: Remarkable (2.7x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Remarkable: 385,164 ops/sec
• Micromarkdown: 363,280 ops/sec
• Snarkdown: 301,865 ops/sec
• Markdown-it: 272,097 ops/sec
• CommonMark: 243,850 ops/sec
• Marked: 141,212 ops/sec

Firefox 6 runs

Micromarkdown

418K/s

Remarkable

294K/s

Snarkdown

280K/s

Markdown-it

218K/s

CommonMark

188K/s

Marked

168K/s

Fastest: Micromarkdown (2.5x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Micromarkdown: 418,002 ops/sec
• Remarkable: 294,390 ops/sec
• Snarkdown: 279,796 ops/sec
• Markdown-it: 217,711 ops/sec
• CommonMark: 188,117 ops/sec
• Marked: 167,989 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: 23 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:152.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/152.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 152 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Micromarkdown

771K/s

Remarkable

457K/s

Snarkdown

424K/s

Markdown-it

369K/s

CommonMark

336K/s

Marked

278K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Micromarkdown	770,696 Ops/sec
Remarkable	456,706 Ops/sec
Snarkdown	423,525 Ops/sec
Markdown-it	369,146 Ops/sec
CommonMark	336,086 Ops/sec
Marked	277,806 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 explanation of the provided JSON benchmark data.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of six popular JavaScript Markdown implementations: Marked, CommonMark, Markdown-it, Remarkable, Micromarkdown, and Snarkdown. The benchmark uses a fixed test case (`md`) that contains a short paragraph with multiple formatting elements (bold, italic, etc.).

**Options Compared**

Each test case compares the performance of one Markdown implementation versus another. The options compared are:

1. Marked vs. CommonMark
2. Marked vs. Markdown-it
3. Marked vs. Remarkable
4. Marked vs. Micromarkdown
5. Marked vs. Snarkdown
6. CommonMark vs. Markdown-it
7. CommonMark vs. Remarkable
8. CommonMark vs. Micromarkdown
9. CommonMark vs. Snarkdown
10. Markdown-it vs. Remarkable
11. Markdown-it vs. Micromarkdown
12. Markdown-it vs. Snarkdown
13. Remarkable vs. Micromarkdown
14. Remarkable vs. Snarkdown
15. Micromarkdown vs. Snarkdown

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

Here's a brief overview of each implementation:

1. **Marked**: Fast and lightweight, but has limited features.
	* Pros: Small size, fast rendering.
	* Cons: Limited formatting options.
2. **CommonMark**: More feature-rich than Marked, but slower.
	* Pros: Wide range of formatting options, more compatible with CommonMark parsers.
	* Cons: Larger size, slower rendering.
3. **Markdown-it**: Fast and flexible, with a large community and many plugins.
	* Pros: Highly customizable, fast rendering.
	* Cons: Large size, can be overwhelming for beginners.
4. **Remarkable**: Similar to Markdown-it, but with a stronger focus on readability.
	* Pros: Beautiful typography, fast rendering.
	* Cons: Smaller community compared to Markdown-it.
5. **Micromarkdown**: Fast and lightweight, with a focus on simplicity.
	* Pros: Small size, easy to use.
	* Cons: Limited features, not as compatible with other parsers.
6. **Snarkdown**: Fast and feature-rich, with a strong focus on web compatibility.
	* Pros: Wide range of formatting options, fast rendering.
	* Cons: Smaller community compared to Marked.

**Library Usage**

The benchmark uses several libraries:

1. **marked**: A popular Markdown parser.
2. **commonmark**: A widely-used CommonMark parser.
3. **markdown-it**: A flexible and customizable Markdown parser.
4. **remarkable**: A beautiful and readable Markdown implementation.
5. **micromarkdown**: A lightweight and simple Markdown parser.
6. **snarkdown**: A fast and feature-rich Markdown parser.

**Special JavaScript Features**

None of the implementations use special JavaScript features or syntax in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that some Markdown parsers may rely on specific browser features, such as CSS gradients or animations.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative Markdown implementations, some popular options include:

1. **Showdown**: A fast and lightweight Markdown parser.
2. **Katex**: A mathematical notation renderer based on MathJax.
3. **Prince**: A commercial-grade Markdown implementation with a strong focus on print formatting.

Keep in mind that each implementation has its strengths and weaknesses, and the best choice for your project will depend on your specific needs and requirements.

Markdown Performance Comparison 21 (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 35 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 29 runs

Firefox 6 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 21 (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 35 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 29 runs

Firefox 6 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`