Benchmark: Vanilla JS VS JQuery DOM perfomancee

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.1.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<div id="test">Test</div>

Tests:

Vanilla JS
var el = document.getElementById("test"); window.addEventListener('scroll', function() { console.log(el) })
Jquery
var el = document.getElementById("test"); $(window).on('scroll', function() { console.log(el) })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Vanilla JS
Jquery

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/143.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 143 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Vanilla JS	1565.5 Ops/sec
Jquery	470180.2 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition:**
The benchmark compares the performance of two JavaScript approaches for DOM manipulation: Vanilla JavaScript (without any libraries) and jQuery, a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation.

**Options Compared:**

1. **Vanilla JavaScript**: This approach uses native JavaScript methods to interact with the DOM. The benchmark definition includes a simple script that retrieves an HTML element using `document.getElementById` and logs its value on every scroll event.
2. **jQuery**: This approach uses jQuery's DOM manipulation functions, such as `$` (the dollar sign) to select elements and `.on()` to attach event listeners.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

1. **Vanilla JavaScript**:
	* Pros:
		+ Lightweight and doesn't introduce an additional library.
		+ Can be faster since it doesn't incur the overhead of jQuery's functions.
	* Cons:
		+ More verbose and error-prone due to the need to manually select elements and handle event listeners.
2. **jQuery**:
	* Pros:
		+ Faster development and maintenance costs, thanks to its extensive library functions.
		+ Easier to use, especially for DOM manipulation tasks.
	* Cons:
		+ Introduces an additional library that needs to be loaded and maintained.
		+ Can lead to slower performance due to the overhead of jQuery's functions.

**Library (jQuery):**
jQuery is a popular JavaScript library that simplifies DOM manipulation by providing a simple, consistent way to select elements and attach event listeners. Its functions are optimized for performance and ease of use.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax:**
The benchmark uses the `console.log` function to output logging data, which is not specific to any particular JavaScript version or syntax.

**Other Alternatives:**

1. **Lodash**: Another popular JavaScript library that provides a set of utility functions, including DOM manipulation helpers.
2. **React**: A JavaScript library for building user interfaces, which can also be used for DOM manipulation tasks.
3. **Pure.js**: A lightweight JavaScript library for DOM manipulation and event handling.

In summary, the benchmark compares the performance of Vanilla JavaScript (native DOM interaction) against jQuery (a popular library for DOM manipulation). The results will help users understand the trade-offs between using a native approach versus leveraging an established library like jQuery.

Related benchmarks:

Vanilla JS VS JQuery DOM perfomancee (version: 0)

Vanilla JS VS JQuery DOM perfomance

Comparing performance of: Vanilla JS vs Jquery

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Vanilla JS

Jquery

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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