NextJS vs Astro - Performance comparison

There has certainly been a large interest in Astro recently, and with v2.0 now out a lot of devs have been excited about the performance benefits of Astro over other frameworks like NextJS. So with that in mind I took to comparing both these frameworks and seeing which one is best.

What exactly is Astro and NextJS?

Astro 2.0 and NextJS 13 are two popular web development frameworks that have their unique features and performance capabilities. Both allow Server-Side Rendering (SSR) and Client-Side Rendering (CSR). NextJS is built around React, Astro is defined by on its own framework but allows you to include components from any JS framework.

Server-Side Rendering (SSR)

Both Astro 2.0 and NextJS 13 provide server-side rendering out of the box, allowing faster page loads and better search engine optimization (SEO) capabilities. Astro has a much faster response time when comparing the two deployed to the same cloud provider on the same app slot setup.

Client-Side Rendering (CSR) and Static-Site Generation (SSG)

NextJS can now perform CSR by using the use-client flag at the top of any component file. Astro can do this by flagging a component inside a page with <Component client:load /> but this has to be used every time the component is referenced in a page, unlike NextJS. Astro can also perform SSG which means the render of static content is done on build. The disadvantage of this is that if you want to change anything that is static then you will need to rebuild and deploy the application to do this.

Build Time

Astro 2.0 has a faster build time than NextJS 13, thanks to its use of pre-built static HTML and CSS - the SSG mentioned above. This can be particularly useful for large-scale projects with many pages, where build time can be a significant bottleneck. Astro will only rebuild changes so the first build might take longer than any


NextJS 13 is larger Astro 2.0, due to its bundled features such as automatic code splitting, prefetching, and optimized images. However, these features can significantly improve page load times, particularly for larger web applications.


Astro 2.0 offers greater customization options than NextJS 13, with the ability to add and remove features as needed. This can be particularly useful for developers who want more control over their web application's functionality and design.

Community and Ecosystem

NextJS 13 has a larger and more established community than Astro 2.0, with more third-party packages and plugins available. This is going to change over time. Visual Studio already has an extension to support highlighting for Astro and JetBrains are working on supporting Astro in there 2023.*.* versions of WebStorm.

In summary, both Astro 2.0 and NextJS 13 are capable frameworks with their unique strengths and weaknesses. Astro 2.0 provides faster build times and greater customization options, while NextJS 13 offers a more extensive community and ecosystem and more advanced features. Ultimately, the choice between these two frameworks will depend on the specific needs and requirements of a particular web development project. But the future looks great for these two to compete with each other and improve the experience for developer and end-users alike.

All articles are my own thoughts. Gathered from reading articles and trying things out.