Benchmark: createElement vs cloneNode but form

Tests:

createElement
var list = [], n = 0; while(true) { n++; list.push(document.createElement('form')); if(n===100000) break; }
cloneNode
var list = [], n = 0, node = document.createElement('form'); while(true) { n++; list.push(node.cloneNode(true)); if(n===100000) 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.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON defines a benchmark with two test cases:

1. `createElement`: Measures the performance of creating new DOM elements using the `document.createElement` method.
2. `cloneNode`: Measures the performance of cloning existing DOM elements using the `node.cloneNode(true)` method.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, the options being compared are:

* Creating a new DOM element from scratch using `document.createElement`.
* Cloning an existing DOM element using `node.cloneNode(true)`.

The pros and cons of these approaches are:

* **createElement**: Pros:
	+ Creates a brand new DOM element with its own set of properties (e.g., `style`, `class`, etc.).
	+ Allows for more control over the element's attributes and content.
	+ Can be faster if you need to create many elements quickly, as it avoids cloning an existing element.
* Cons:
	+ Creates a new DOM node, which can lead to increased memory usage and garbage collection overhead.
	+ May result in slower performance due to the overhead of creating a new element.
* **cloneNode**: Pros:
	+ Copies an existing DOM element, avoiding the need for extra memory allocation.
	+ Can be faster than `createElement` if you're working with many elements that only need minor changes (e.g., text content).
	+ Reduces memory usage and garbage collection overhead.

Cons:

* Creates a copy of the original element's properties, which can lead to slower performance if the cloned element has many attributes or complex styles.
* May not preserve certain attributes or properties of the original element (e.g., `style` or `class`).

**Library**

In this benchmark, no libraries are explicitly mentioned. However, it's worth noting that both `createElement` and `cloneNode` methods rely on the DOM API, which is a core part of the browser's JavaScript engine.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There aren't any special JS features or syntax used in these test cases beyond standard JavaScript and DOM APIs. If there were, it would be worth mentioning them to provide context for the benchmark results.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches to creating or cloning DOM elements, here are a few options:

1. **Use a library like jQuery**: Libraries like jQuery can provide optimized methods for working with DOM elements, including `jqx` or `createJS`. However, these libraries often come with their own performance overhead and may not always be the fastest option.
2. **Use a custom implementation**: Depending on your specific use case, you might consider implementing your own custom solution for creating or cloning DOM elements. This could involve using Web Workers or other low-level optimization techniques to improve performance.
3. **Use WebAssembly (WASM)**: If you're targeting a specific browser or platform, you might explore using WASM to optimize performance-critical code.

Keep in mind that the best approach depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and target audience.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/83.0.4103.116 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 83 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
createElement	7.4 Ops/sec
cloneNode	9.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

createElement vs cloneNode but form (version: 0)

Faster way to create new dom elements before insertion

Comparing performance of: createElement vs cloneNode

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

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):