Benchmark: fetch vs ajax call V2

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.6.0/jquery.min.js"></script>

AخA
 
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.6.0/jquery.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

function showResult(data) {
    console.log(data);
}
var newUrl = "https://www.googleapis.com/discovery/v1/apis";

 
function showResult(data) {    console.log(data);}var newUrl = "https://www.googleapis.com/discovery/v1/apis";

Tests:

Ajax

var request = jQuery.ajax({
    type: "GET",
    url: newUrl,
    success: showResult,
    data: null
});

 
var request = jQuery.ajax({    type: "GET",    url: newUrl,    success: showResult,    data: null});

Fetch

fetch(newUrl)
  .then(
    function(response) {
      response.json().then(function(data) {
        showResult(data);
      });
    }
  )
  .catch(function(err) {
    console.log('Fetch Error :-S', err);
  });

 
fetch(newUrl)  .then(    function(response) {      response.json().then(function(data) {        showResult(data);      });    }  )  .catch(function(err) {    console.log('Fetch Error :-S', err);  });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Experimental features:

Memory measurements supported only in Chrome.
For precise memory measurements Chrome must be launched with --enable-precise-memory-info flag.
More information: Monitoring JavaScript Memory

Test case name	Result
Ajax
Fetch

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/15.1 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 15 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Ajax	10521.3 Ops/sec
Fetch	8323.5 Ops/sec

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

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

Overview

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches: making an AJAX call using jQuery and making a fetch request to retrieve data from Google's API.

Script Preparation Code

The script preparation code is responsible for setting up the environment before running the benchmark. In this case, it defines:

A function showResult that logs the received data to the console.
A URL newUrl used in both AJAX and fetch requests.

HTML Preparation Code

The HTML preparation code includes a script tag that loads the jQuery library, which is used for making the AJAX call.

Individual Test Cases

There are two test cases:

Ajax: This test case uses the jQuery library to make an AJAX call to newUrl. The jQuery.ajax method sends a GET request with the specified URL, success callback (showResult), and no data.
Fetch: This test case uses the fetch API to retrieve data from Google's API at newUrl. It sets up a promise chain to handle both successful and error responses.

Comparison

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these two approaches:

AJAX (using jQuery)
Fetch

Pros and Cons

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

AJAX (using jQuery)

Pros:

Well-established library with extensive documentation
Easy to use for simple requests
Can be used for both synchronous and asynchronous requests

Cons:

Can add unnecessary overhead due to the library's complexity
May not perform well with large datasets or complex requests
Not as modern or widely adopted as fetch API

Fetch

Pros:

Part of the modern web platform, making it easy to use
Lightweight and efficient compared to jQuery
Supports both synchronous and asynchronous requests

Cons:

Less mature than jQuery, which can lead to fewer resources available for documentation and community support
May require more code to achieve similar functionality

Library: jQuery

jQuery is a popular JavaScript library used for making AJAX calls. It provides an easy-to-use API for sending HTTP requests, manipulating the DOM, and handling events.

In this benchmark, jQuery is used to make an AJAX call to Google's API. The jQuery.ajax method sends a GET request with the specified URL and success callback (showResult). This approach uses the browser's native support for XMLHTTPRequest objects under the hood.

Special JS Feature/Syntax: None

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark, such as async/await or Promises.

Other Alternatives

If you're looking for alternatives to jQuery and the fetch API, consider:

Axios: A popular promise-based HTTP client library that provides a simple and intuitive way to make requests.
Modern Promise APIs (e.g., async/await): For handling asynchronous code in a more modern and concise way.

Note that these alternatives may require adjustments to your codebase and workflow.

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches: making an AJAX call using jQuery and making a fetch request to retrieve data from Google's API.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is responsible for setting up the environment before running the benchmark. In this case, it defines:

1. A function `showResult` that logs the received data to the console.
2. A URL `newUrl` used in both AJAX and fetch requests.

**HTML Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code includes a script tag that loads the jQuery library, which is used for making the AJAX call.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Ajax**: This test case uses the jQuery library to make an AJAX call to `newUrl`. The `jQuery.ajax` method sends a GET request with the specified URL, success callback (`showResult`), and no data.
2. **Fetch**: This test case uses the fetch API to retrieve data from Google's API at `newUrl`. It sets up a promise chain to handle both successful and error responses.

**Comparison**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these two approaches:

* AJAX (using jQuery)
* Fetch

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

### AJAX (using jQuery)

Pros:

* Well-established library with extensive documentation
* Easy to use for simple requests
* Can be used for both synchronous and asynchronous requests

Cons:

* Can add unnecessary overhead due to the library's complexity
* May not perform well with large datasets or complex requests
* Not as modern or widely adopted as fetch API

### Fetch

Pros:

* Part of the modern web platform, making it easy to use
* Lightweight and efficient compared to jQuery
* Supports both synchronous and asynchronous requests

Cons:

* Less mature than jQuery, which can lead to fewer resources available for documentation and community support
* May require more code to achieve similar functionality

**Library: jQuery**

jQuery is a popular JavaScript library used for making AJAX calls. It provides an easy-to-use API for sending HTTP requests, manipulating the DOM, and handling events.

In this benchmark, jQuery is used to make an AJAX call to Google's API. The `jQuery.ajax` method sends a GET request with the specified URL and success callback (`showResult`). This approach uses the browser's native support for XMLHTTPRequest objects under the hood.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark, such as async/await or Promises.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to jQuery and the fetch API, consider:

* Axios: A popular promise-based HTTP client library that provides a simple and intuitive way to make requests.
* Modern Promise APIs (e.g., async/await): For handling asynchronous code in a more modern and concise way.

Note that these alternatives may require adjustments to your codebase and workflow.

Related benchmarks:

fetch vs ajax call V2 (version: 0)

fetch vs ajax call

Comparing performance of: Ajax vs Fetch

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Ajax

Fetch

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):

AJAX (using jQuery)

Fetch