Benchmark: jQuery by id vs Document.getElementById1

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="http://ajax.aspnetcdn.com/ajax/jQuery/jquery-3.1.0.min.js"></script>
<div id="testElement"></div>

Tests:

jQuery
var el = $("#testElement")
Vanilla JS
for(var i = 0; i < 10; i++) { var el = document.getElementById('testElement'); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
jQuery
Vanilla JS

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/87.0.4280.141 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 87 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
jQuery	817744.6 Ops/sec
Vanilla JS	219892.2 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark compares the speed of two approaches to get an HTML element by its ID:

1. **jQuery**: Using jQuery's `$` function to select the element.
2. **Vanilla JS**: Using the `document.getElementById()` method directly.

**Description of the options:**

* **jQuery**: jQuery is a popular JavaScript library that simplifies DOM manipulation and event handling. The `$` function is used to select elements from the DOM. In this benchmark, the test case uses jQuery's `$` function to get the element by its ID.
* **Vanilla JS**: Vanilla JS refers to plain JavaScript, without any additional libraries or frameworks. The `document.getElementById()` method is used directly to access an element in the DOM.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

* **jQuery**:
	+ Pros:
		- Faster execution time due to jQuery's optimized implementation.
		- Easier to use, especially for complex selectors.
	+ Cons:
		- Requires loading an additional JavaScript file (jQuery).
		- May introduce unnecessary overhead if not used carefully.
* **Vanilla JS**:
	+ Pros:
		- No additional library or framework overhead.
		- More control over the DOM manipulation process.
	+ Cons:
		- Slower execution time compared to jQuery.
		- Requires more boilerplate code for simple selectors.

**Library and its purpose:**

* **jQuery**: jQuery is a JavaScript library that simplifies DOM manipulation, event handling, and Ajax interactions. Its primary purpose is to make HTML document traversal and manipulation easier to do in JavaScript.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

There are no special features or syntax used in this benchmark. Both approaches use standard JavaScript functions.

**Other alternatives:**

If you want to test other approaches, here are some examples:

* **Sizzle**: A pure-JavaScript library that provides a selector engine similar to jQuery's `$` function.
* **Query**: Another pure-JavaScript library that offers a similar API to jQuery for DOM selection and manipulation.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics compared to vanilla JavaScript or jQuery.

Related benchmarks:

jQuery by id vs Document.getElementById1 (version: 1)

Comparing speed of getting element by id with jQuery vs Vanilla JS

Comparing performance of: jQuery vs Vanilla JS

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

jQuery

Vanilla JS

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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