Benchmark: Markdown Performance Comparison 4

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://unpkg.com/showdown@1.9.1/dist/showdown.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://unpkg.com/marked@1.1.0/marked.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://unpkg.com/commonmark@0.29.1/dist/commonmark.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://unpkg.com/markdown-it@11.0.0/dist/markdown-it.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://unpkg.com/remarkable@2.0.1/dist/remarkable.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://unpkg.com/micromarkdown@0.3.0/dist/micromarkdown.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://unpkg.com/snarkdown@1.2.2/dist/snarkdown.umd.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var conv = {
  showdown: new showdown.Converter(),
  marked: marked,
  cm: new commonmark.HtmlRenderer(),
  mdit: markdownit({ html: true }),
  remarkable: new remarkable.Remarkable(),
  micromarkdown: window.micromarkdown,
  snarkdown: window.snarkdown
};

var pars = {
  cm: new commonmark.Parser()
};

var md = ["# The Static, Static Blog Generator\n\n### May 17th, 2014\n\nWe all like *publishing* our thoughts online - but why is it such a bother to run a CMS?\n\nManaging databases, `updating` software, and keeping track of our *content* often cuts into the most important activity: *expressing ourselves*.\n\nThe web makes it really __easy to share__ our thoughts with millions of individuals from around the world. With it we are *able to talk* about the things we love.\n\nOnline publishing platform have a problem though - they [require](https://1993.uk) certain software to be installed on web servers in order to work. This often means running your own server or paying someone else who will setup the [required](https://1993.uk) parts for you.\n\nAfter you setup the system, constant updates are required to make sure that any bugs in the software you are running are patched [immediately](https://1993.uk) to prevent your *site* from being hacked. This __often means__ having a recent backup of your data",
          ""].join("\n");

Tests:

Showdown.js
conv.showdown.makeHtml(md);
Marked
conv.marked(md);
CommonMark
conv.cm.render(pars.cm.parse(md));
Markdown-it
conv.mdit.render(md);
Remarkable
conv.remarkable.render(md);
Micromarkdown
conv.micromarkdown.parse(md);
Snarkdown
conv.snarkdown(md);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Showdown.js
Marked
CommonMark
Markdown-it
Remarkable
Micromarkdown
Snarkdown

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The provided benchmark compares the performance of six different JavaScript libraries for rendering Markdown text: Showdown.js, Marked, CommonMark, Markdown-it, Remarkable, and Micromarkdown.

**Libraries Compared:**

1. **Showdown.js**: A popular Markdown conversion library that uses a custom parser.
2. **Marked**: A lightweight Markdown parsing library that uses the commonmark parser.
3. **CommonMark**: A Markdown specification-based parser that is designed to be fast and efficient.
4. **Markdown-it**: A Markdown parsing library that provides a wide range of features, including syntax highlighting and table support.
5. **Remarkable**: A Markdown rendering library that uses a custom parser and provides a simple API for rendering Markdown text.
6. **Micromarkdown**: A lightweight Markdown parsing library that is designed to be fast and efficient.

**Options Compared:**

Each test case compares the performance of one library against another, with the same input Markdown text. The options being compared are:

* Rendering speed (ExecutionsPerSecond)
* Browser performance

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

1. **Showdown.js**: Pros - easy to use, well-established community; Cons - custom parser can lead to performance issues if not optimized.
2. **Marked**: Pros - lightweight, fast, widely adopted; Cons - may not support all Markdown features out of the box.
3. **CommonMark**: Pros - highly optimized for performance, supports most Markdown features; Cons - steeper learning curve due to its specification-based design.
4. **Markdown-it**: Pros - feature-rich, flexible; Cons - larger size and complexity compared to other libraries.
5. **Remarkable**: Pros - simple API, fast rendering; Cons - limited customization options.
6. **Micromarkdown**: Pros - extremely lightweight, fast; Cons - may not support all Markdown features or have a large user base.

**Browser Performance:**

The benchmark also reports browser performance metrics (RawUAString, Browser, DevicePlatform, OperatingSystem) for each test case. These values can help provide additional context about the libraries' performance in different environments.

In summary, this benchmark provides a comprehensive comparison of six popular JavaScript libraries for rendering Markdown text, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses in terms of performance and feature support.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:89.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/89.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 89 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Showdown.js	2669.8 Ops/sec
Marked	12116.5 Ops/sec
CommonMark	13074.0 Ops/sec
Markdown-it	10709.2 Ops/sec
Remarkable	15915.0 Ops/sec
Micromarkdown	21650.8 Ops/sec
Snarkdown	16262.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Markdown Performance Comparison 4 (version: 0)

A performance comparison of leading Javascript Markdown implementations.

Comparing performance of: Showdown.js vs Marked vs CommonMark vs Markdown-it vs Remarkable vs Micromarkdown vs Snarkdown

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Showdown.js

Marked

CommonMark

Markdown-it

Remarkable

Micromarkdown

Snarkdown

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):