Benchmark: singular clone vs batch clone

Script Preparation code:

const DIV = document.createElement('div')
const SPN = document.createElement('span')
const BTN = document.createElement('button')
const INP = document.createElement('input')
const H2 = document.createElement('h2')
const H4 = document.createElement('h4')
const AX = document.createElement('a')
const UL = document.createElement('ul')
const LI = document.createElement('li')

Tests:

batch clone
let u0 = UL.cloneNode(true) let l0 = LI.cloneNode(true) let l1 = LI.cloneNode(true) let l2 = LI.cloneNode(true) u0.appendChild(l0) u0.appendChild(l1) u0.appendChild(l2) for (let i = 0; i < 200; ++i) { let ui = u0.cloneNode(true) let uj = ui.firstElementChild; let uk = uj.nextElementSibling; let ul = uk.nextElementSibling; }
singular clone
for (let i = 0; i < 200; ++i) { let u0 = UL.cloneNode(true) let l0 = LI.cloneNode(true) let l1 = LI.cloneNode(true) let l2 = LI.cloneNode(true) u0.appendChild(l0) u0.appendChild(l1) u0.appendChild(l2) }
querySelectorAll
let u0 = UL.cloneNode(true) let l0 = LI.cloneNode(true) let l1 = LI.cloneNode(true) let l2 = LI.cloneNode(true) u0.appendChild(l0) u0.appendChild(l1) u0.appendChild(l2) l0.dataset.f00='1'; l1.dataset.f00='2'; l2.dataset.f00='3'; for (let i = 0; i < 200; ++i) { let ui = u0.cloneNode(true) let uj = ui.querySelectorAll('[data-f00]'); }

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 8 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 8 runs

batch clone

11K/s

querySelectorAll

9K/s

singular clone

9K/s

Fastest: batch clone (1.3x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ batch clone: 10,925 ops/sec
• querySelectorAll: 9,354 ops/sec
• singular clone: 8,726 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
batch clone
singular clone
querySelectorAll

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

batch clone

9K/s

querySelectorAll

8K/s

singular clone

8K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ batch clone	8,532 Ops/sec
querySelectorAll	8,018 Ops/sec
singular clone	7,707 Ops/sec

singular clone vs batch clone (version: 6)

Comparing performance of: `batch clone vs singular clone vs querySelectorAll`

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

batch clone

singular clone

querySelectorAll

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 8 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 8 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

singular clone vs batch clone (version: 6)

Comparing performance of: batch clone vs singular clone vs querySelectorAll

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

batch clone

singular clone

querySelectorAll

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 8 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 8 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `batch clone vs singular clone vs querySelectorAll`