Benchmark: Markdown Performance Comparison Again

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 type="text/javascript" src="https://lukeuser.cacus.feralhosting.com/markdown.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://lukeuser.cacus.feralhosting.com/markdown.altw.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,
    markdown: window.markdown,
    markdownaltw: window.markdownaltw
};

var pars = {
    cm: new commonmark.Parser()
};

function md() {
return "# 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(),true);
Snarkdown
conv.snarkdown(md());
markdown-wasm
try {markdown.parse(md());} catch {}
markdown-wasm-alt
try {markdownaltw.parse(md());} catch {}

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Marked
CommonMark
Markdown-it
Remarkable
Micromarkdown
Snarkdown
markdown-wasm
markdown-wasm-alt

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/144.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 144 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

markdown-wasm

216K/s

markdown-wasm-alt

200K/s

Remarkable

145K/s

Micromarkdown

145K/s

Snarkdown

125K/s

CommonMark

123K/s

Markdown-it

114K/s

Marked

53K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ markdown-wasm	216,199 Ops/sec
markdown-wasm-alt	199,930 Ops/sec
Remarkable	145,301 Ops/sec
Micromarkdown	144,757 Ops/sec
Snarkdown	124,621 Ops/sec
CommonMark	123,442 Ops/sec
Markdown-it	113,724 Ops/sec
Marked	53,271 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of different JavaScript Markdown parsers. The test case generates a Markdown string using the `md` function and then passes it to each parser implementation, which renders the Markdown string into HTML.

**Parser Implementations Compared**

The benchmark compares six different Markdown parser implementations:

1. **Marked**: A popular JavaScript Markdown parser.
2. **CommonMark**: An implementation of the Common Mark specification, a standardized Markdown syntax.
3. **Markdown-it**: Another popular JavaScript Markdown parser.
4. **Remarkable**: A Markdown parser with a focus on performance and readability.
5. **Micromarkdown**: A lightweight Markdown parser with a simple API.
6. **Snarkdown**: A Markdown parser with a focus on simplicity and ease of use.

**Options Compared**

Each parser implementation has its own set of options that can be configured when rendering the Markdown string. These options might include:

* **HTML output**: Whether to return HTML or plain text.
* **Sanitization**: Whether to sanitize the output HTML for security reasons.
* **Custom styles**: Whether to apply custom styles to the rendered HTML.

**Pros and Cons**

Each parser implementation has its own strengths and weaknesses. For example:

* **Marked** is widely used and well-maintained, but it can be slower than some other implementations due to its more complex rendering logic.
* **CommonMark** provides a standardized way of parsing Markdown syntax, making it easier to implement, but it might require more configuration and tweaking.
* **Markdown-it** has a large community and a wide range of plugins available, but it can be slower than some other implementations due to its modular architecture.

**Performance Results**

The benchmark results show the number of executions per second for each parser implementation on a desktop machine running Chrome 97. The top performers are:

1. **Markdown-wasm**: A WebAssembly-based implementation that outperforms all other parsers by a significant margin.
2. **Micromarkdown**: A lightweight implementation that provides good performance and is easy to use.

The bottom performers are:

1. **Marked**: Although widely used, it lags behind other implementations in terms of performance.
2. **Remarkable**: While designed for performance, it has some configuration overhead that affects its execution speed.

**Conclusion**

In summary, the benchmark measures the performance of different JavaScript Markdown parsers and highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each implementation. The results show that Micromarkdown is a strong contender in terms of performance, while Marked and Remarkable require more configuration and tweaking to achieve optimal performance.

Markdown Performance Comparison Again (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 vs markdown-wasm vs markdown-wasm-alt`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Marked

CommonMark

Markdown-it

Remarkable

Micromarkdown

Snarkdown

markdown-wasm

markdown-wasm-alt

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 Again (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 vs markdown-wasm vs markdown-wasm-alt

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Marked

CommonMark

Markdown-it

Remarkable

Micromarkdown

Snarkdown

markdown-wasm

markdown-wasm-alt

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 vs markdown-wasm vs markdown-wasm-alt`