Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
json performance
(version: 0)
json vs json.parse
Comparing performance of:
Simple json vs JSON.parse
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var data = { "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" } ] }
Tests:
Simple json
let receivedData = data;
JSON.parse
let receivedDataParsed = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(data));
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Simple json
JSON.parse
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
4 months ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/143.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 143 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
Simple json
112627064.0 Ops/sec
JSON.parse
593495.0 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided JSON data and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons. **Benchmark Definition** The `json performance` benchmark is comparing two approaches to process JSON data: using the `JSON.parse()` method and using a simple assignment (`let receivedData = data;`). **Test Case 1: Simple json** This test case uses no library or special JavaScript feature. It simply assigns the entire `data` object to a variable named `receivedData`. This approach is straightforward and efficient, as it doesn't involve parsing or manipulating the JSON data. Pros: * Fast execution times * No additional overhead from parsing or manipulation Cons: * Doesn't take advantage of any built-in optimization in JavaScript for handling large JSON objects * May not be suitable for cases where the JSON data needs to be manipulated or processed further **Test Case 2: JSON.parse** This test case uses the `JSON.parse()` method to parse the JSON data. The `JSON.stringify()` function is used as a workaround, similar to how it's used in Test Case 1. Pros: * Can handle large JSON objects efficiently * Allows for more control over the parsing process Cons: * Slower execution times compared to Test Case 1 * May involve additional overhead from parsing and manipulation **Library Used: None** The `JSON` library is a built-in JavaScript library that provides functions for working with JSON data. In this benchmark, it's used to parse the JSON string using `JSON.parse()`. **Special JavaScript Feature: None** There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. **Other Alternatives** Other alternatives for processing JSON data include: * Using a dedicated JSON parsing library like FastJSON or json5 * Utilizing Web Workers to parallelize the JSON parsing process * Leveraging browser-specific optimization techniques, such as Firefox's built-in JSON parser Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be relevant for this specific benchmark, and their pros and cons may vary depending on the use case.
Related benchmarks:
RFDC clone vs Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Parse
RFDC clone (circles: true) vs Lodash cloneDeep vs JSON Clone
Object Cloning Comparsion
klona vs core-js structuredClone vs Lodash cloneDeep vs json parse stringify
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?