Benchmark: getElementById, querySelector, window

HTML Preparation code:

<div id="test">Test</div>

Tests:

getElementById
document.getElementById("test");
querySelector
document.querySelector("#test")
window
test

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
getElementById
querySelector
window

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the benchmark and its components for you.

**Benchmark Overview**

The MeasureThat.net benchmark is designed to compare the performance of three different methods: `document.getElementById`, `document.querySelector`, and accessing the global object (`window`).

**Options Being Compared**

1. **`document.getElementById`**: This method uses a string-based selector to find an element by its ID.
2. **`document.querySelector`**: This method also uses a CSS-like syntax to select elements, but it allows for more flexibility, such as selecting multiple elements or using attributes.
3. **Accessing the global object (`window`)**: In this case, the test simply accesses the `test` variable defined in the HTML code.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **`document.getElementById`**:
	* Pros: Simple, lightweight, and widely supported by older browsers.
	* Cons: May be slower due to its reliance on string-based selectors.
2. **`document.querySelector`**:
	* Pros: More flexible and powerful than `getElementById`, can select multiple elements or use attributes.
	* Cons: May have performance overhead due to its CSS-like syntax, might not work in older browsers that don't support it.
3. **Accessing the global object (`window`)**:
	* Pros: Fastest method, as it directly accesses a variable defined in the HTML code.
	* Cons: Not applicable for finding elements by ID or using attributes.

**Library Used**

In this benchmark, there is no specific library being used, but `document.querySelector` relies on CSS-like syntax, which is part of the W3C specification. This means that any modern browser that supports CSS will also support `querySelector`.

**Special JavaScript Features or Syntax**

None mentioned in this specific benchmark.

**Other Considerations**

* Browser: The benchmark uses Chrome 125 as the test browser.
* Device Platform: Desktop.
* Operating System: Windows.

**Alternative Approaches**

If you want to compare these methods with other approaches, here are some alternatives:

1. **`document.querySelectorAll`**: This method selects multiple elements using a CSS-like syntax, similar to `querySelector`.
2. **`document.createStyleSheet`**: This method creates a new stylesheet and appends a style rule to it, allowing for more control over element selection.
3. **Using a library like jQuery or Sizzle**: These libraries provide their own implementation of `querySelector`, which might offer improved performance or flexibility.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics and compatibility with older browsers compared to the original methods being tested in this benchmark.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/125.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 125 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
getElementById	4614211.5 Ops/sec
querySelector	2973199.2 Ops/sec
window	1598609.6 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

getElementById, querySelector, window (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: getElementById vs querySelector vs window

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

getElementById

querySelector

window

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):