Benchmark: jQuery by id vs Document.getElementById

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.1.1/jquery.slim.min.js"></script>
<div class="test"></div>
<div class="test2"></div>

Tests:

jQuery 3.1.1 Slim
var el = $(".test");
Vanilla JS
var el = document.getElementsByClassName('test');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
jQuery 3.1.1 Slim
Vanilla JS

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/135.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 135 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
jQuery 3.1.1 Slim	2986396.5 Ops/sec
Vanilla JS	23554690.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into explaining the benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents a microbenchmark that compares the speed of two approaches to retrieve an HTML element by its ID:

1. **jQuery**: A JavaScript library that provides a simplified way to interact with the DOM.
2. **Vanilla JS (Document.getElementById)**: The native JavaScript method to retrieve an element by its ID.

**Options compared**

In this benchmark, we have two options being compared:

* jQuery 3.1.1 Slim
* Vanilla JS using `document.getElementById`

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

**jQuery:**

Pros:

* Simplified way to interact with the DOM
* Easier to use, especially for complex DOM manipulations
* Provides a convenient way to select elements by ID

Cons:

* Adds extra weight to your application's bundle size (due to its library overhead)
* Can be slower than native JavaScript methods due to the library's internal workings

**Vanilla JS (`document.getElementById`):**

Pros:

* Lightweight, with minimal added overhead
* Fast and efficient since it uses the native browser method
* No additional dependencies or libraries needed

Cons:

* Requires more manual effort to construct complex DOM selections
* Can be verbose and harder to read for some developers

**Library: jQuery**

jQuery is a widely-used JavaScript library that provides an easy-to-use API for interacting with the DOM. Its primary purpose is to simplify DOM manipulation, event handling, and Ajax requests.

In this benchmark, we're using the `$(selector)` syntax to select elements by ID. This is just one of many selectors available in jQuery, but it's a popular and commonly used one.

**Special JS feature/syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark that would require additional explanation.

**Other alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches for retrieving elements by ID, here are some options:

* **Sizzle**: Another popular JavaScript library that provides a lightweight way to select elements from the DOM. However, it's not as widely used as jQuery.
* **CSS selectors**: You can use CSS selectors like `#id` or `[id="id"]` to select elements by ID in vanilla JavaScript. This approach is more verbose than jQuery, but can be faster since it leverages the browser's CSS engine.
* **Element query API**: Some modern browsers support the Element Query API, which provides a more efficient way to select elements from the DOM.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might require additional setup or modifications to your codebase.

Related benchmarks:

jQuery by id vs Document.getElementById (version: 0)

Comparing speed of getting element by id with jQuery vs Vanilla JS

Comparing performance of: jQuery 3.1.1 Slim vs Vanilla JS

Created: 9 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

jQuery 3.1.1 Slim

Vanilla JS

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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