Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Input vs Textarea large text
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Input test vs Textarea test
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<input id="input" placeholder="Input test" value="" /> <textarea id="textarea" placeholder="Textarea test" value=""></textarea>
Script Preparation code:
let largeText = '' for(i=0; i<100; i++) { largeText += (Math.random() + 1).toString(36).substring(2) } function populateThenEmpty(dom, times) { for(ii=0; ii<times; ii++) { dom.value = largeText dom.value = '' } }
Tests:
Input test
populateThenEmpty(document.getElementById('input'), 1000)
Textarea test
populateThenEmpty(document.getElementById('textarea'), 1000)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Input test
Textarea test
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/135.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 135 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
Input test
852.7 Ops/sec
Textarea test
607.3 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and its options. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark measures the performance of two different input methods: an `<input>` element and a `<textarea>` element. Both elements are populated with a large amount of random text, and then emptied repeatedly to test the rendering and updating speed of each element. **Options Compared** Two options are compared: 1. **<input> Element**: This option tests the performance of an `<input>` element when populated with large amounts of text and then emptied. 2. **<textarea> Element**: This option tests the performance of a `<textarea>` element when populated with large amounts of text and then emptied. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** 1. **<input> Element**: * Pros: May be faster due to its smaller size compared to a `<textarea>`, which can be affected by scrolling. * Cons: May not accurately represent real-world use cases, as users often interact with textareas for inputting large amounts of text. 2. **<textarea> Element**: * Pros: More representative of real-world use cases, as users often interact with textareas for inputting large amounts of text. * Cons: May be slower due to the additional rendering and scrolling complexity introduced by its larger size. **Library Used** The `populateThenEmpty` function uses a JavaScript library that is not specified in the provided benchmark. However, based on the code structure and naming conventions, it appears to be a custom-built or third-party library designed for benchmarking UI component performance. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes used in this benchmark. The code primarily focuses on testing the performance of HTML elements with standard JavaScript functionality. **Other Considerations** * The large amount of random text used to populate both elements can lead to a high number of executions, which may skew results. * The use of `document.getElementById` for accessing elements assumes that the page has already loaded and DOM elements are available. In a real-world scenario, this might not always be the case. * The benchmark does not account for the impact of CSS styles or layout on rendering performance. **Alternatives** If you were to recreate this benchmark, consider the following alternatives: 1. **Use a more representative text input method**, such as a `<select>` element with multiple options or a `contenteditable` div. 2. **Introduce scrolling complexity** by adding a large number of text lines or using a scrolling-enabled textarea with a small height. 3. **Test rendering performance on different devices** by running the benchmark on various browsers, operating systems, and screen resolutions. These alternatives can help provide more accurate insights into the performance characteristics of input elements in real-world scenarios.
Related benchmarks:
.endsWith vs .charAt for single character
Lodash vs vanila 2
.startsWith vs .charAt vs str[0] for single character
+ '' vs .toString() v5 rand
.startsWith vs .charAt vs .charCodeAt for single character
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?