Benchmark: JSON.stringify vs structuredClone

Script Preparation code:

var MyObject = {
  description: 'Creates a deep copy of source, which should be an object or an array.',
  myNumber: 123456789,
  myBoolean: true,
  jayson: {
    stringify: 'JSON.stringify() method converts a JavaScript value to a JSON string....',
    parse: 'JSON.parse() method parses a JSON string...'
  }
};

var myCopy = null;

Tests:

JSON.stringify
myCopy = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject));
structuredClone
myCopy = structuredClone(MyObject);

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 1,675 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 1,200 runs

JSON.stringify

1.1M/s

structuredClone

516K/s

Fastest: JSON.stringify (2.1x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ JSON.stringify: 1,085,355 ops/sec
• structuredClone: 516,090 ops/sec

Firefox 256 runs

JSON.stringify

945K/s

structuredClone

685K/s

Fastest: JSON.stringify (1.4x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ JSON.stringify: 944,802 ops/sec
• structuredClone: 684,861 ops/sec

Safari 41 runs

JSON.stringify

1.7M/s

structuredClone

873K/s

Fastest: JSON.stringify (1.9x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ JSON.stringify: 1,651,859 ops/sec
• structuredClone: 873,244 ops/sec

Other 12 runs

JSON.stringify

969K/s

structuredClone

404K/s

Fastest: JSON.stringify (2.4x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ JSON.stringify: 968,662 ops/sec
• structuredClone: 403,980 ops/sec

Mobile Results:

Chrome 88 runs

JSON.stringify

476K/s

structuredClone

166K/s

Fastest: JSON.stringify (2.9x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ JSON.stringify: 475,604 ops/sec
• structuredClone: 165,805 ops/sec

Safari 55 runs

JSON.stringify

1.7M/s

structuredClone

893K/s

Fastest: JSON.stringify (1.9x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ JSON.stringify: 1,652,769 ops/sec
• structuredClone: 893,018 ops/sec

Firefox 23 runs

JSON.stringify

433K/s

structuredClone

261K/s

Fastest: JSON.stringify (1.7x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ JSON.stringify: 433,220 ops/sec
• structuredClone: 260,862 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
JSON.stringify
structuredClone

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/150.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 150 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

JSON.stringify

3.0M/s

structuredClone

1.3M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ JSON.stringify	2,960,335 Ops/sec
structuredClone	1,250,197 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its results.

**Benchmark Definition**

The test creates two JavaScript microbenchmarks that compare the performance of `JSON.stringify` and `structuredClone`. The goal is to determine which method is faster for creating a deep copy of an object.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code defines a JavaScript object `MyObject` with various properties, including `description`, `myNumber`, `myBoolean`, and `jayson`. The `jayson` property contains another object with two properties: `stringify` and `parse`.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided.

**Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of two test cases:

1. **JSON.stringify**: Creates a deep copy of `MyObject` using `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject))`.
2. **structuredClone**: Creates a deep copy of `MyObject` using `structuredClone(MyObject)`.

**Library and its Purpose**

In this benchmark, the `structuredClone` library is used to create a deep copy of the object. The `structuredClone` function was introduced in ECMAScript 2020 as a replacement for `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify())`. It provides a safer way to clone objects, as it can handle cyclic references and other edge cases.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark. The only notable aspect is the use of `structuredClone`, which is a relatively new function introduced in ECMAScript 2020.

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches**

The two approaches are:

* **JSON.stringify**: This method has been widely used for years, but it has some limitations:
	+ It can throw errors if the object contains cyclic references or other invalid data.
	+ It can be slower than `structuredClone` due to its parsing steps.
* **structuredClone**: This method is safer and faster than `JSON.stringify`, as it avoids parsing and creates a deep copy directly:
	+ It handles cyclic references and other edge cases more robustly.
	+ It is generally faster than `JSON.stringify`.

**Other Alternatives**

Before the introduction of `structuredClone`, developers used to use `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify())` or third-party libraries like Lodash's `cloneDeep()` function. Both approaches had their limitations, but `structuredClone` has become the recommended way to create deep copies in modern JavaScript.

In summary, the benchmark shows that `structuredClone` is generally faster and safer than `JSON.stringify` for creating deep copies of objects. This is a significant improvement over the older approach, making it easier to write robust and efficient code.

JSON.stringify vs structuredClone (version: 0)

JSON.stringify vs structuredClone

Comparing performance of: `JSON.stringify vs structuredClone`

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

JSON.stringify

structuredClone

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 1,675 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 1,200 runs

Firefox 256 runs

Safari 41 runs

Other 12 runs

Mobile Results:

Chrome 88 runs

Safari 55 runs

Firefox 23 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

JSON.stringify vs structuredClone (version: 0)

JSON.stringify vs structuredClone

Comparing performance of: JSON.stringify vs structuredClone

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

JSON.stringify

structuredClone

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 1,675 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 1,200 runs

Firefox 256 runs

Safari 41 runs

Other 12 runs

Mobile Results:

Chrome 88 runs

Safari 55 runs

Firefox 23 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: `JSON.stringify vs structuredClone`