Benchmark: createElement vs cloneNode customcustomcustomcustom

Tests:

createElement
var list = [], n = 0; while(true) { n++; list.push(document.createElement('div')); if(n===3) break; }
cloneNode
var list = [], n = 0, node = document.createElement('div'); while(true) { n++; list.push(node.cloneNode(true)); if(n===3) break; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
createElement
cloneNode

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the test cases and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches: `createElement` and `cloneNode`. These methods are used to create new DOM elements in JavaScript. The goal is to determine which approach is faster for creating a large number of elements.

**Options Compared**

* **createElement**: Creates a new DOM element from scratch using the `document.createElement()` method.
* **cloneNode**: Creates a deep copy of an existing DOM node using the `node.cloneNode(true)` method, and then uses this cloned node as the base for subsequent creations.

**Pros and Cons**

* **createElement**:
	+ Pros: Can create new elements with any attributes or styles you specify.
	+ Cons: May incur additional overhead due to creating a new element from scratch, which can be slower than using an existing node.
* **cloneNode**:
	+ Pros: Can reuse the same base node for multiple creations, reducing overhead and potentially improving performance.
	+ Cons: Requires the existence of an initial node to clone from, which may not always be available.

**Other Considerations**

* In modern browsers, `createElement` is generally faster than `cloneNode` because it doesn't require creating a deep copy of an existing node. However, if you need to create multiple elements with similar attributes or styles, using `cloneNode` can be more efficient.
* The benchmark assumes that the initial element is created using `document.createElement()`, which is a common practice in web development.

**Test Cases**

The two test cases provided measure the execution time of creating 3 elements using each approach:

1. **createElement**: Creates 3 new elements from scratch using `document.createElement('div')`.
2. **cloneNode**: Creates 3 cloned nodes by cloning an initial element created with `document.createElement('div')` and then pushing these cloned nodes into an array.

**Library Usage**

None of the test cases use a specific JavaScript library, except for the built-in DOM API (`document.createElement()` and `node.cloneNode()`).

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special features or syntax used in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing two simple approaches to creating new DOM elements.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to create a large number of elements, you might consider using other approaches, such as:

* Using a template engine like Handlebars or Pug to generate HTML templates.
* Utilizing a library like DOMManipulator or jsdom to manipulate the DOM.
* Implementing your own custom element creation algorithm.

However, these alternatives may have their own performance trade-offs and are not necessarily faster than the `createElement` vs `cloneNode` comparison.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/116.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 116 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
createElement	641402.0 Ops/sec
cloneNode	698579.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

createElement vs cloneNode customcustomcustomcustom (version: 0)

createElement vs cloneNode

Comparing performance of: createElement vs cloneNode

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

createElement

cloneNode

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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