Benchmark: Markdown Performance Comparison 39

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()
};

function md() {
var randword = Math.random().toString(36).substring(2, 15) + " ";
return [randword, randword + randword, "## " + randword+randword+randword, "", "", "1. " + randword+randword+randword, "2. " + randword+randword+randword, "", "", "---", "", "***" + randword +randword+randword+"***", "",
        randword+randword+randword+randword+randword+randword+randword+randword].join("\n");
}

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(),true);
Snarkdown
conv.snarkdown(md());

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/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/132.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 132 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Remarkable

71K/s

Micromarkdown

68K/s

Snarkdown

62K/s

Markdown-it

57K/s

CommonMark

48K/s

Marked

33K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Remarkable	70,558 Ops/sec
Micromarkdown	68,138 Ops/sec
Snarkdown	62,111 Ops/sec
Markdown-it	57,187 Ops/sec
CommonMark	47,940 Ops/sec
Marked	32,706 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll provide a detailed explanation of the benchmark, its options, pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a Markdown performance comparison benchmark on MeasureThat.net. The benchmark compares the execution speeds of six different Markdown libraries: marked, commonmark, markdown-it, remarkable, micromarkdown, and snarkdown.

**Options Compared**

1. **marked**: A popular JavaScript Markdown parser.
2. **commonmark**: A fast and lightweight Markdown parser.
3. **markdown-it**: A versatile Markdown library that supports various features like syntax highlighting and tables.
4. **remarkable**: A simple and efficient Markdown parser designed for speed and ease of use.
5. **micromarkdown**: A tiny and lightweight Markdown library ideal for small code snippets or minimalistic text rendering.
6. **snarkdown**: A fast and feature-rich Markdown library that supports various syntax highlighting and formatting options.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **marked**:
	* Pros: Wide support for Markdown features, easy to use, and a large community of users.
	* Cons: Can be slow and resource-intensive compared to other libraries.
2. **commonmark**:
	* Pros: Extremely fast and lightweight, making it suitable for applications with limited resources.
	* Cons: May not support all Markdown features or syntax highlighting options.
3. **markdown-it**:
	* Pros: Feature-rich, supports advanced features like syntax highlighting, tables, and code blocks.
	* Cons: Can be slower than some other libraries due to its feature set.
4. **remarkable**:
	* Pros: Fast, lightweight, and easy to use, making it ideal for simple Markdown rendering needs.
	* Cons: Limited support for advanced features or syntax highlighting options.
5. **micromarkdown**:
	* Pros: Extremely tiny and lightweight, making it suitable for small code snippets or minimalistic text rendering.
	* Cons: May not support all Markdown features or syntax highlighting options.
6. **snarkdown**:
	* Pros: Fast, feature-rich, and supports advanced syntax highlighting options.
	* Cons: Can be slower than some other libraries due to its feature set.

**Library Descriptions**

1. **marked**: A popular JavaScript Markdown parser that provides a simple and easy-to-use API for rendering Markdown text.
2. **commonmark**: A fast and lightweight Markdown parser that is designed to be minimalistic and efficient while still supporting most Markdown features.
3. **markdown-it**: A versatile Markdown library that supports various features like syntax highlighting, tables, and code blocks.
4. **remarkable**: A simple and efficient Markdown parser designed for speed and ease of use, with a focus on performance and simplicity.
5. **micromarkdown**: A tiny and lightweight Markdown library ideal for small code snippets or minimalistic text rendering.
6. **snarkdown**: A fast and feature-rich Markdown library that supports various syntax highlighting options.

**Special JavaScript Features or Syntax**

The benchmark does not explicitly use any special JavaScript features or syntax, but it does leverage the `MeasureThat.net` platform's capabilities to compare the performance of each Markdown library.

In conclusion, the benchmark provides a comprehensive comparison of six popular Markdown libraries, allowing users to evaluate their performance and choose the best fit for their specific needs.

Markdown Performance Comparison 39 (version: 0) Benchmark.js

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

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 39 (version: 0) Benchmark.js

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

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`