Benchmark: vanilla vs jquery speed

HTML Preparation code:

<div class="test"></div>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>

Tests:

vanilla add class
document.querySelector(".test").classList.add("next-class");
jquery add class
$(document).find(".test").addClass("next-class");
vanilla find element
document.querySelector(".test");
jquery find element
$(document).find(".test");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
vanilla add class
jquery add class
vanilla find element
jquery find element

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/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
vanilla add class	3567349.2 Ops/sec
jquery add class	690806.6 Ops/sec
vanilla find element	16918820.0 Ops/sec
jquery find element	1531000.2 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and what are its pros and cons.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between using vanilla JavaScript (without any libraries) versus jQuery for simple DOM manipulation tasks.

**Script Preparation Code**

The Script Preparation Code is empty, which means that no special setup or initialization code is required before running the tests. This is a good practice as it allows the test results to focus on the actual differences in performance between the two approaches.

**Html Preparation Code**

The Html Preparation Code includes a reference to jQuery's library file (`https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js`) using a CDN (Content Delivery Network). This code prepares the environment for running the tests by including the necessary dependencies.

**Test Cases**

There are four test cases:

1. **vanilla add class**: Tests whether vanilla JavaScript can add a class to an element.
2. **jquery add class**: Tests whether jQuery can add a class to an element.
3. **vanilla find element**: Tests whether vanilla JavaScript can find an element by its selector.
4. **jquery find element**: Tests whether jQuery can find an element by its selector.

**Comparison of Approaches**

The two approaches being compared are:

* Vanilla JavaScript: uses native JavaScript methods and APIs to manipulate the DOM.
* jQuery: is a library that provides a simplified API for DOM manipulation, often used for cross-browser compatibility and ease of use.

**Pros and Cons**

**Vanilla JavaScript:**

Pros:

* Lightweight and efficient
* Native performance
* No additional dependencies or overhead

Cons:

* Requires knowledge of native JavaScript APIs
* May have browser-specific quirks or differences in behavior

**jQuery:**

Pros:

* Simplified API for DOM manipulation
* Cross-browser compatibility
* Easy to learn and use, especially for developers new to JavaScript

Cons:

* Additional dependencies (library) increase overhead
* May introduce performance overhead due to the extra processing required by the library

**Library Used in Test Cases**

In this benchmark, jQuery is used as a library. The purpose of including jQuery is to provide a simplified API for DOM manipulation and make it easier to compare with vanilla JavaScript.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntax mentioned in the benchmark setup code. However, it's worth noting that using `$(document)` as a context object (as seen in some test cases) is an older jQuery convention, but still widely supported.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to vanilla JavaScript and jQuery, consider the following:

* **Modern JavaScript**: Utilize modern JavaScript features like Promises, async/await, and Web APIs (e.g., `fetch()`, `XMLHttpRequest`) for efficient DOM manipulation.
* **React or Vue.js**: These popular front-end frameworks provide built-in DOM manipulation utilities and can simplify development. However, they may introduce additional overhead compared to vanilla JavaScript.
* **Preact**: A lightweight alternative to React, which shares some similarities with vanilla JavaScript.
* **Vanilla-Lite**: A minimalistic JavaScript library that provides a simplified API for DOM manipulation, similar to jQuery.

Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on your project's specific requirements and your team's expertise.

Related benchmarks:

vanilla vs jquery speed (version: 0)

asdf

Comparing performance of: vanilla add class vs jquery add class vs vanilla find element vs jquery find element

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

vanilla add class

jquery add class

vanilla find element

jquery find element

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):