Benchmark: jQuery vs Vanilla JS Speed Test - CNC 2

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.slim.min.js"></script>
<div id="target">Hello World</div>

Tests:

jQuery
var $target = $('#target'); var $div = $('<div/>'); for(let i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { $div.addClass('test-div'); $target.append($div); }
VanillaJS
for(let i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { const e = document.createElement('div'); e.className = 'test-div'; document.getElementById('target').appendChild(e); }

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 18 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 18 runs

VanillaJS

90/s

jQuery

22/s

Fastest: VanillaJS (4.1x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ VanillaJS: 90 ops/sec
• jQuery: 22 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
jQuery
VanillaJS

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 115 on Windows 7

View result in a separate tab

VanillaJS

92/s

jQuery

13/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ VanillaJS	92 Ops/sec
jQuery	13 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark.

**What is tested on the provided JSON?**

The provided JSON represents two JavaScript microbenchmarks that compare the performance of jQuery (a popular JavaScript library) and vanilla JavaScript (the native JavaScript syntax) in executing a specific code snippet. The code snippet appends 10,000 HTML elements to an existing element (`#target`) using both libraries.

**Options compared:**

The two options compared are:

1. **jQuery**: A JavaScript library that provides a simplified way of manipulating the Document Object Model (DOM). It adds functionality to the native JavaScript syntax.
2. **VanillaJS**: The native JavaScript syntax, without any additional libraries or modifications.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

* **jQuery**:
	+ Pros:
		- Simplifies DOM manipulation
		- Provides a familiar API for developers
		- Can improve performance in some cases due to its optimized DOM handling
	+ Cons:
		- Adds additional overhead due to the library's functionality
		- Can lead to slower execution times compared to vanilla JavaScript
* **VanillaJS**:
	+ Pros:
		- Native syntax, so no additional overhead from a library
		- Faster execution times due to the lack of additional functionality
	+ Cons:
		- Requires more knowledge of the DOM and native JavaScript APIs
		- May require more code and complexity for certain tasks

**Library: jQuery**

jQuery is a popular JavaScript library that provides a simplified way of manipulating the DOM. Its primary purpose is to simplify common tasks such as selecting elements, manipulating attributes, and handling events. In the provided benchmark, jQuery is used to append HTML elements to an existing element (`#target`) using its `append` method.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes mentioned in the provided code snippet.

**Other alternatives:**

For DOM manipulation, other popular alternatives include:

* **React**: A JavaScript library for building user interfaces
* **Angular**: A JavaScript framework for building complex web applications
* **Preact**: A lightweight alternative to React

For vanilla JavaScript DOM manipulation, developers can use native APIs such as `document.createElement`, `document.getElementById`, and `appendChild`.

**Benchmark preparation code:**

The provided HTML preparation code includes the jQuery library, which is loaded from an external source (`//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.slim.min.js`). The JavaScript preparation code for both options is similar, with the only difference being the use of the jQuery `append` method versus the native `appendChild` method.

**Latest benchmark result:**

The latest benchmark results show that VanillaJS outperforms jQuery in this specific test case, with an average of 44.19889450073242 executions per second compared to jQuery's 6.685769081115723 executions per second. This suggests that, for this particular use case, vanilla JavaScript may be a better choice due to its faster execution times.

jQuery vs Vanilla JS Speed Test - CNC 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `jQuery vs VanillaJS`

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

jQuery

VanillaJS

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 18 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 18 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

jQuery vs Vanilla JS Speed Test - CNC 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: jQuery vs VanillaJS

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

jQuery

VanillaJS

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 18 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 18 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: `jQuery vs VanillaJS`