Benchmark: klona vs core-js structuredClone vs Lodash cloneDeep

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://unpkg.com/klona@2.0.5/dist/index.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/core-js/3.23.4/minified.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.21/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var MyObject = [{
        "id": "0001",
        "type": "donut",
        "name": "Cake",
        "ppu": 0.55,
        "batters": {
            "batter": [{
                    "id": "1001",
                    "type": "Regular"
                },
                {
                    "id": "1002",
                    "type": "Chocolate"
                },
                {
                    "id": "1003",
                    "type": "Blueberry"
                },
                {
                    "id": "1004",
                    "type": "Devil's Food"
                }
            ]
        },
        "topping": [{
                "id": "5001",
                "type": "None"
            },
            {
                "id": "5002",
                "type": "Glazed"
            },
            {
                "id": "5005",
                "type": "Sugar"
            },
            {
                "id": "5007",
                "type": "Powdered Sugar"
            },
            {
                "id": "5006",
                "type": "Chocolate with Sprinkles"
            },
            {
                "id": "5003",
                "type": "Chocolate"
            },
            {
                "id": "5004",
                "type": "Maple"
            }
        ]
    },
    {
        "id": "0002",
        "type": "donut",
        "name": "Raised",
        "ppu": 0.55,
        "batters": {
            "batter": [{
                "id": "1001",
                "type": "Regular"
            }]
        },
        "topping": [{
                "id": "5001",
                "type": "None"
            },
            {
                "id": "5002",
                "type": "Glazed"
            },
            {
                "id": "5005",
                "type": "Sugar"
            },
            {
                "id": "5003",
                "type": "Chocolate"
            },
            {
                "id": "5004",
                "type": "Maple"
            }
        ]
    },
    {
        "id": "0003",
        "type": "donut",
        "name": "Old Fashioned",
        "ppu": 0.55,
        "batters": {
            "batter": [{
                    "id": "1001",
                    "type": "Regular"
                },
                {
                    "id": "1002",
                    "type": "Chocolate"
                }
            ]
        },
        "topping": [{
                "id": "5001",
                "type": "None"
            },
            {
                "id": "5002",
                "type": "Glazed"
            },
            {
                "id": "5003",
                "type": "Chocolate"
            },
            {
                "id": "5004",
                "type": "Maple"
            }
        ]
    }
];


var myCopy = null;

Tests:

klona
myCopy = klona(MyObject);
structuredClone
myCopy = structuredClone(MyObject);
cloneDeep
myCopy = _.cloneDeep(MyObject);

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 58 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 45 runs

klona

514K/s

structuredClone

163K/s

cloneDeep

88K/s

Fastest: klona (5.9x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ klona: 513,797 ops/sec
• structuredClone: 163,189 ops/sec
• cloneDeep: 87,542 ops/sec

Firefox 8 runs

klona

350K/s

cloneDeep

74K/s

structuredClone

55K/s

Fastest: klona (6.4x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ klona: 350,428 ops/sec
• cloneDeep: 73,871 ops/sec
• structuredClone: 55,034 ops/sec

Mobile Results:

Chrome 5 runs

klona

232K/s

structuredClone

136K/s

cloneDeep

79K/s

Fastest: klona (2.9x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ klona: 232,414 ops/sec
• structuredClone: 135,761 ops/sec
• cloneDeep: 79,407 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
klona
structuredClone
cloneDeep

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/148.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 148 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

klona

558K/s

structuredClone

144K/s

cloneDeep

88K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ klona	557,684 Ops/sec
structuredClone	144,374 Ops/sec
cloneDeep	87,542 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll do my best to break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and discussed.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of three cloning functions:

1. `klona`: A JavaScript library for creating shallow and deep clones of objects.
2. `structuredClone`: A built-in JavaScript function introduced in ECMAScript 2020 (ES12) that creates a deep clone of an object.
3. `_.cloneDeep` from the Lodash library: A utility function for creating deep copies of objects.

**What's being tested**

The benchmark tests how quickly each cloning function can create a copy of a large, nested JSON object (`MyObject`). The test measures the number of executions per second (ExecutionsPerSecond) for each function on various browsers and devices.

**Comparison of cloning approaches**

Here are some pros and cons of each cloning approach:

1. **klona**:
	* Pros: Can create shallow clones as well as deep clones, which might be beneficial for certain use cases.
	* Cons: May not work correctly with circular references (i.e., objects that reference themselves) or very large objects due to memory constraints.
2. **structuredClone**:
	* Pros: Built-in and efficient, works correctly with circular references, and is designed for deep cloning.
	* Cons: Only available in modern browsers (Chrome 129 and above), which might limit the benchmark's relevance for older browsers.
3. **_.cloneDeep` from Lodash**:
	* Pros: Works well with circular references and can handle large objects efficiently.
	* Cons: Requires an external library, which might introduce additional overhead.

**Other considerations**

1. **Memory usage**: The benchmark assumes that the cloning functions will create a new copy of the original object in memory. This might not be the case for very large objects or those with sensitive data (e.g., encryption keys).
2. **Performance optimization**: Some browsers or devices might have performance optimizations in place that affect the benchmark's results.

**Browser and device variations**

The benchmark measures performance across different browsers (Chrome 129) and devices (Desktop), which might influence the results due to differences in:

1. CPU architecture
2. Memory constraints
3. Browser-specific optimizations

Overall, this benchmark provides insight into the performance differences between various cloning functions, but keep in mind the potential limitations mentioned above.

klona vs core-js structuredClone vs Lodash cloneDeep (version: 4) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `klona vs structuredClone vs cloneDeep`

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

klona

structuredClone

cloneDeep

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 58 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 45 runs

Firefox 8 runs

Mobile Results:

Chrome 5 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

klona vs core-js structuredClone vs Lodash cloneDeep (version: 4) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: klona vs structuredClone vs cloneDeep

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

klona

structuredClone

cloneDeep

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 58 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 45 runs

Firefox 8 runs

Mobile Results:

Chrome 5 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: `klona vs structuredClone vs cloneDeep`