Tauri vs Electron: Which Framework Wins in Performance and Size?

Introduction

Hopp is creating a cross‑platform remote‑control application and needed to decide whether to use Tauri or Electron. Both frameworks avoid writing native code for each operating system, but they differ significantly in architecture, performance, bundle size and associated trade‑offs.

Main architectural differences

Electron runs a Node.js main process and launches a Chromium renderer for each window, which means the JavaScript runtime and full browser engine are bundled with the app. Tauri, by contrast, uses Rust for its backend and relies on the operating system’s native WebView (WebView2 on Windows, WKWebView on macOS, WebKitGTK on Linux), resulting in much smaller binaries.

Feature comparison

Startup time: both are fast, with only a few hundred milliseconds difference.

Memory usage (benchmark): Electron ~409 MB vs Tauri ~172 MB when opening six windows.

Bundle size (benchmark): Tauri ~8.6 MiB vs Electron ~244 MiB.

Backend language: Rust for Tauri, JavaScript/Node.js for Electron.

Web technology: native WebView for Tauri, Chromium for Electron.

Benchmark commands

# Create Electron app
npx create-electron-app@latest electron-demo-app --template=vite-typescript

# Create Tauri app (TypeScript + Vite + React)
yarn create tauri-app

Build time

Because Tauri must compile Rust, its initial build is slower (≈13 s) than Electron’s (≈1 s), but subsequent incremental builds are much faster.

Why Hopp chose Tauri

1. Backend performance : Hopp’s custom WebRTC implementation requires high‑performance video processing, which Rust handles efficiently without the overhead of an extra Node.js process.

2. Sidecar support : Tauri natively supports sidecar processes for handling video streams and input, simplifying architecture compared to manually managing external processes in Electron.

3. Feature parity : Tauri’s rapid development (especially with v2) has closed the gap with Electron, offering built‑in auto‑updates and strong security focus that match Hopp’s needs.

Conclusion

Both Tauri and Electron are capable frameworks for desktop applications. The best choice depends on specific project requirements, team expertise and priorities such as binary size, performance, and native integration. For Hopp, Tauri’s lightweight Rust backend and native WebView made it the preferred option.