Static Site Generation vs Dynamic Content Generation

Developers should use SSG when building performance-critical, secure, and scalable websites with predictable content meets developers should learn and use dynamic content generation when building applications that require personalization, real-time updates, or user-specific data, such as e-commerce sites, social media platforms, or content management systems. 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

Dynamic Content Generation

Developers should learn and use dynamic content generation when building applications that require personalization, real-time updates, or user-specific data, such as e-commerce sites, social media platforms, or content management systems

Pros

• It is essential for creating interactive web experiences where content changes based on user actions, database queries, or external APIs, allowing for scalable and maintainable solutions compared to static sites
• Related to: server-side-scripting, database-integration

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

These tools serve different purposes. Static Site Generation is a methodology while Dynamic Content Generation 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 Dynamic Content Generation excels in its own space.