Static Site Generation vs Client Side Rendering

Developers should use SSG when building performance-critical, secure, and scalable websites with predictable content meets developers should use csr when building dynamic, interactive web applications that require real-time updates, such as dashboards, social media platforms, or complex forms, as it provides a smooth user experience with fast client-side navigation. Here's our take.

Static Site Generation

Nice Pick

Developers should use SSG when building performance-critical, secure, and scalable websites with predictable content

Pros

• It eliminates server-side processing delays, reduces hosting costs, and enhances security by minimizing attack surfaces
• Related to: jamstack, next-js

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Client Side Rendering

Developers should use CSR when building dynamic, interactive web applications that require real-time updates, such as dashboards, social media platforms, or complex forms, as it provides a smooth user experience with fast client-side navigation

Pros

• It's ideal for applications where user interactions drive frequent UI changes, as it minimizes server requests after the initial load, reducing latency for subsequent actions
• Related to: javascript, react

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

These tools serve different purposes. Static Site Generation is a methodology while Client Side Rendering is a concept. We picked Static Site Generation based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.

The Bottom Line

Static Site Generation wins

Based on overall popularity. Static Site Generation is more widely used, but Client Side Rendering excels in its own space.