Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Create Castom tag
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Simple DOM 1 vs Simple DOM 2 vs Custom DOM
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<div id="ref"></div>
Script Preparation code:
var ref = document.getElementById('ref');
Tests:
Simple DOM 1
document.createElement('div');
Simple DOM 2
document.createElement('span');
Custom DOM
document.createElement('wg-custom-tag');
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Simple DOM 1
Simple DOM 2
Custom DOM
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
**Understanding the Benchmark** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test on MeasureThat.net. The test consists of three individual test cases that measure the performance of creating different types of elements in a Document Object Model (DOM). **Options Compared** In each test case, two options are compared: 1. **Element type**: The test creates either a `div`, `span`, or a custom element (`wg-custom-tag`). 2. **No library or extension**: Each test is run without any additional libraries or extensions. **Pros and Cons of Different Approaches** * **Creating elements directly (div, span)**: + Pros: Simple, straightforward, and efficient. + Cons: May not accurately reflect real-world scenarios where custom elements are used. * **Using a custom element (wg-custom-tag)**: + Pros: More realistic representation of modern web development, which increasingly uses custom elements. + Cons: May introduce additional overhead due to the custom element's implementation. **Libraries and Extensions** In this benchmark, no specific libraries or extensions are mentioned. However, it is essential to note that when creating custom elements, developers often rely on libraries like Web Components (WC) or Polymer Frameworks to simplify the process. **Special JavaScript Features or Syntax** None of the test cases explicitly use special JavaScript features or syntax, such as async/await, Promises, or Generators. The focus is solely on measuring the performance of element creation. **Other Considerations** * **Browser and device support**: The benchmark runs on a Windows 10 desktop with Firefox 96, which may not be representative of all users' environments. * **Execution frequency**: The number of executions per second (ExecutionsPerSecond) indicates how quickly each test can create elements. A higher value typically suggests better performance. **Alternatives** If you're interested in exploring similar benchmarks or creating your own, consider the following alternatives: 1. MeasureThat.net: Offers a wide range of JavaScript microbenchmarks and is an excellent resource for developers. 2. Browserbench: Provides benchmarking tests for various web-related tasks, including page loading, parsing, and rendering. 3. JSPerf: Allows you to create and share your own JavaScript benchmarks, making it an excellent tool for comparing different implementations. Keep in mind that these alternatives may have varying levels of complexity and scope compared to MeasureThat.net's focused approach on DOM creation performance.
Related benchmarks:
Test_our_data
id vs class test
class vs id test
Test11111
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?