Frontend • ~14 min read
React.js vs Next.js: Complete Framework Comparison
React is the foundation; Next.js builds on it with powerful features like server-side rendering, static generation, and file-based routing. This guide covers architecture, performance, SEO, and when to choose each framework.
Overview and relationship
React is a JavaScript library for building user interfaces with components. It handles the view layer—rendering UI and managing state—but leaves routing, data fetching, and build configuration to you or other libraries.
Next.js is a React framework that adds a full-featured development environment on top of React: server-side rendering (SSR), static site generation (SSG), API routes, automatic code splitting, file-based routing, and production optimizations out of the box.
Think of it this way: React is the engine; Next.js is the complete car.
React fundamentals
React (created by Meta) revolutionized frontend development with its component-based architecture and declarative approach to building UIs.
Core concepts
- Components: Reusable UI building blocks. Function or class-based.
- JSX: JavaScript syntax extension for writing HTML-like code in JS.
- Virtual DOM: In-memory representation of DOM for efficient updates.
- State management: useState, useReducer, or external libraries (Redux, Zustand).
- Hooks: Functions like useState, useEffect for state and side effects.
- One-way data flow: Props flow down, events bubble up.
Basic React component
import { useState } from 'react';
function Counter() {
const [count, setCount] = useState(0);
return (
<div>
<p>Count: {count}</p>
<button onClick={() => setCount(count + 1)}>
Increment
</button>
</div>
);
}What React doesn't include
- Routing (need React Router or similar)
- Server-side rendering (client-side by default)
- Data fetching conventions (you choose the approach)
- Build tooling (need Create React App, Vite, or custom setup)
- API routes or backend functionality
Advantages
- Lightweight library, learn core concepts quickly.
- Huge ecosystem and community support.
- Flexibility to choose tools and architecture.
- Mature, battle-tested in production at massive scale.
- Can integrate into existing projects incrementally.
Disadvantages
- Requires additional setup and tooling decisions.
- No SSR out of the box (SEO challenges).
- Client-side routing needs separate library.
- Configuration overhead for complex projects.
Next.js fundamentals
Next.js (created by Vercel) is a full-stack React framework that provides structure and features for production-ready applications.
Key features
- Server-side rendering (SSR): Render pages on the server per request.
- Static site generation (SSG): Pre-render pages at build time.
- Incremental static regeneration (ISR): Update static content without rebuilding entire site.
- File-based routing: Create routes by adding files to pages/app directory.
- API routes: Build backend endpoints alongside frontend code.
- Automatic code splitting: Load only JavaScript needed for each page.
- Image optimization: Built-in Image component with automatic optimization.
- TypeScript support: First-class TypeScript integration.
Basic Next.js page (App Router)
// app/page.tsx
export default function Home() {
return (
<div>
<h1>Welcome to Next.js</h1>
<p>Server-rendered by default</p>
</div>
);
}
// This page is server-rendered automaticallyAdvantages
- Production-ready out of the box with sensible defaults.
- Excellent SEO with server-side rendering.
- Fast page loads with automatic code splitting.
- Hybrid rendering: mix SSR, SSG, and CSR per page.
- Built-in routing, no extra library needed.
- API routes for full-stack development.
- Easy deployment (especially to Vercel).
Disadvantages
- Steeper learning curve than vanilla React.
- More opinionated architecture (less flexibility).
- Larger bundle size than minimal React setup.
- Server infrastructure required for SSR (vs static hosting).
- Vendor lock-in concerns with Vercel-specific features.
Rendering strategies
Rendering strategy is the biggest difference between React and Next.js.
Client-Side Rendering (CSR) - React default
- How it works: Server sends minimal HTML + JavaScript bundle. Browser downloads JS, executes it, renders page.
- Pros: Simple hosting (static files), rich interactivity, fast navigation after initial load.
- Cons: Slow initial load (download + parse + execute JS), poor SEO (search bots may not execute JS), blank page until JS loads.
Server-Side Rendering (SSR) - Next.js
- How it works: Server renders full HTML for each request. Browser receives complete page, then hydrates with JavaScript for interactivity.
- Pros: Fast initial paint (HTML arrives immediately), excellent SEO, works without JavaScript enabled.
- Cons: Requires server infrastructure, higher server load, slower Time to Interactive (TTI).
Static Site Generation (SSG) - Next.js
- How it works: Pages pre-rendered at build time. Serve static HTML files from CDN.
- Pros: Fastest possible load times, cheap hosting (CDN), perfect SEO.
- Cons: Content is stale until next build, build times grow with page count.
Incremental Static Regeneration (ISR) - Next.js
- How it works: Rebuild individual pages in background after specified interval. Best of SSG + SSR.
- Pros: Fast like SSG, fresh content like SSR, scales to millions of pages.
- Cons: More complex caching logic, first user after revalidation sees stale content.
Routing comparison
React (with React Router)
import { BrowserRouter, Routes, Route } from 'react-router-dom';
function App() {
return (
<BrowserRouter>
<Routes>
<Route path="/" element={<Home />} />
<Route path="/about" element={<About />} />
<Route path="/blog/:id" element={<BlogPost />} />
</Routes>
</BrowserRouter>
);
}- Manual setup required
- Routes defined in code
- Need to install and configure React Router
- Client-side navigation only
Next.js (Pages Router)
pages/
index.tsx → /
about.tsx → /about
blog/
[id].tsx → /blog/:id- File system-based routing
- Zero configuration
- Automatic code splitting per route
- Dynamic routes with [brackets]
Next.js (App Router - newest)
app/
page.tsx → /
about/
page.tsx → /about
blog/
[id]/
page.tsx → /blog/:id- Server components by default
- Layouts and nested routing
- Streaming and Suspense support
- Better data fetching patterns
Performance and optimization
React performance considerations
- Code splitting: Manual with React.lazy() and Suspense.
- Bundle size: You manage optimization (tree shaking, minification).
- Images: No built-in optimization; use external libraries.
- Prefetching: Manual implementation if needed.
Next.js performance features
- Automatic code splitting: Each page loads only its dependencies.
- Image optimization: next/image component automatically optimizes, resizes, lazy loads images.
- Font optimization: next/font eliminates layout shift, self-hosts fonts.
- Script optimization: next/script controls loading priority.
- Prefetching: Automatically prefetches linked pages on hover/viewport.
- Edge runtime: Deploy functions to edge locations for low latency.
Core Web Vitals
Next.js is optimized for Core Web Vitals out of the box:
- LCP (Largest Contentful Paint): Improved with SSR/SSG
- FID (First Input Delay): Reduced with code splitting
- CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift): Font and image optimization prevent shifts
SEO capabilities
React SEO challenges
- Client-side rendering means search bots receive empty HTML shell.
- Google can execute JavaScript but it's slower and not guaranteed for all content.
- Meta tags must be manipulated with react-helmet or similar libraries.
- No server-side rendering without additional setup (custom server or frameworks).
Next.js SEO advantages
- Full HTML in initial response—perfect for search crawlers.
- Built-in Head component for meta tags, title, structured data.
- Metadata API (App Router) for type-safe SEO configuration.
- sitemap.xml and robots.txt generation.
- Static generation ensures fastest crawl times.
Example: Next.js metadata
// app/page.tsx
export const metadata = {
title: 'My Page Title',
description: 'Page description for SEO',
openGraph: {
title: 'OG Title',
description: 'OG Description',
images: ['/og-image.jpg'],
},
};
export default function Page() {
return <h1>Content</h1>;
}Feature comparison
| Feature | React | Next.js |
|---|---|---|
| Rendering | Client-side only | SSR, SSG, ISR, CSR |
| Routing | External library needed | File-based, built-in |
| Code splitting | Manual | Automatic |
| SEO | Challenging | Excellent |
| API routes | No | Yes |
| TypeScript | Manual setup | First-class support |
| Image optimization | No | Built-in |
| Deployment | Static hosting | Vercel, Node server, static |
When to use each
Choose React when:
- Building single-page applications (SPAs) or dashboards.
- You need maximum flexibility in architecture.
- SEO is not a priority (internal tools, authenticated apps).
- You're adding React to existing non-React project incrementally.
- Your team prefers choosing their own tools and libraries.
- You want minimal framework overhead.
Examples:
- Admin dashboards and internal tools
- Web applications behind authentication
- Interactive data visualizations
- Components embedded in existing sites
Choose Next.js when:
- Building public-facing websites that need excellent SEO.
- You want fast initial page loads and performance.
- Your content is mostly static or semi-static (blogs, marketing sites).
- You need server-side rendering for personalized content.
- You want batteries-included developer experience.
- You're building full-stack with API routes.
Examples:
- Marketing websites and landing pages
- E-commerce sites (product pages, SEO critical)
- Blogs and content sites
- SaaS public pages (homepage, pricing, docs)
- News and media sites
Hybrid approach
Many companies use both:
- Next.js for marketing site (homepage, blog, SEO pages)
- React SPA for authenticated application dashboard
This gives you best of both worlds: public pages get SSR/SSG benefits, while the application uses flexible CSR.