Benchmark: RFDC clone vs Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone vs structuredClone

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/rfdc@1.1.4/index.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.20/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var sampleObject = [{
        "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:

Lodash cloneDeep
myCopy = _.cloneDeep(sampleObject);
Json clone
myCopy = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(sampleObject));
RFDC copy
var clone = rfdc(); myCopy = clone(sampleObject);
structuredClone
myCopy = structuredClone(sampleObject);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash cloneDeep
Json clone
RFDC copy
structuredClone

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:140.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/140.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 140 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

RFDC copy

306K/s

Json clone

263K/s

structuredClone

183K/s

Lodash cloneDeep

86K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ RFDC copy	306,364 Ops/sec
Json clone	262,691 Ops/sec
structuredClone	182,698 Ops/sec
Lodash cloneDeep	86,016 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 benchmark and explain what is tested, compared, and their pros/cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark compares the performance of four different methods to create a deep copy of an object:

1. `Lodash cloneDeep`
2. `JSON Clone` (a built-in JavaScript function)
3. `structuredClone` (a new API introduced in ECMAScript 2020)
4. `RFDC copy` (an external library, Rfdc)

**Comparison**

The benchmark prepares a sample object with nested structures and then creates a deep copy of it using each of the four methods. The test case names are included to provide context.

Here's a brief overview of each method:

1. **Lodash cloneDeep**: Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various helper functions, including `cloneDeep` for creating deep copies of objects.
2. **JSON Clone**: This is a built-in JavaScript function that creates a shallow copy of an object using the JSON.parse(JSON.stringify()) syntax.
3. **structuredClone**: This is a new API introduced in ECMAScript 2020 that allows creating a deep copy of an object without serializing and deserializing it, which can be slower for very large objects.
4. **RFDC copy**: Rfdc is an external library that provides a high-performance way to create deep copies of objects.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each method:

1. **Lodash cloneDeep**:
	* Pros: Fast, widely supported, and easy to use.
	* Cons: Requires including Lodash as a dependency.
2. **JSON Clone**:
	* Pros: Built-in function, no dependencies required.
	* Cons: Can be slower than other methods due to serialization and deserialization.
3. **structuredClone**:
	* Pros: Supports deep copies without serialization, efficient for large objects.
	* Cons: New API, may not be supported by older browsers or Node.js versions.
4. **RFDC copy**:
	* Pros: High-performance, optimized for deep copying.
	* Cons: External library dependency, may not be widely supported.

**Benchmark Results**

The latest benchmark results show the execution speed of each method in seconds per second (ExecutionsPerSecond). The fastest method will have the highest value. In this case, `RFDC copy` is the fastest, followed by `Lodash cloneDeep`, then `structuredClone`, and finally `JSON Clone`.

Keep in mind that these results may vary depending on your specific use case, object size, and browser/node.js version.

In conclusion, the choice of method depends on your priorities:

* If you need a fast and widely supported solution, Lodash cloneDeep or RFDC copy might be the best choice.
* If you're targeting older browsers or Node.js versions that don't support structuredClone, JSON Clone might still be an option.
* For high-performance deep copying without serialization, structuredClone is worth considering.

RFDC clone vs Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone vs structuredClone (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `Lodash cloneDeep vs Json clone vs RFDC copy vs structuredClone`

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Json clone

RFDC copy

structuredClone

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

RFDC clone vs Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone vs structuredClone (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash cloneDeep vs Json clone vs RFDC copy vs structuredClone

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Json clone

RFDC copy

structuredClone

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: `Lodash cloneDeep vs Json clone vs RFDC copy vs structuredClone`