Tauri vs. Electron: The Ultimate Desktop Framework Comparison

If you're building a desktop application and looking for a framework, you've likely come across Electron and Tauri. Both allow you to build cross-platform desktop applications using web technologies, but they differ significantly in performance, security, architecture, and resource efficiency.

This article provides an in-depth comparison, covering everything from system architecture to API differences and real-world optimizations.

Architecture Differences

Electron’s Architecture

• Electron bundles a Chromium instance, Node.js, and a custom backend inside a single application.

• Each Electron app includes its own Chromium instance, resulting in high resource consumption.

• Uses Inter-Process Communication (IPC) between the main process (Node.js) and renderer process (frontend UI in Chromium).

Tauri’s Architecture

• Uses the OS’s native WebView instead of bundling Chromium.

• Built on Rust for backend logic, providing better memory safety and efficiency.

• Uses Rust’s messaging system instead of Node.js IPC, reducing the attack surface.

• Requires a much smaller runtime, leading to faster startup and lower memory usage.

Key Architectural Differences

• Electron requires heavy dependencies (Chromium, Node.js), while Tauri is lightweight (Rust + WebView).

• Tauri avoids the cost of running a full browser per app, leading to significant performance gains.

• Electron has a single-process model (running everything in one main process), while Tauri separates UI rendering from business logic.

Performance Comparison

Electron’s Performance

• Applications are large (often 50MB+ due to Chromium bundling).

• Higher CPU and RAM usage, even for idle apps.

• Startup time is slower because Chromium has to initialize.

• Background processes keep running, leading to higher battery drain.

Tauri’s Performance

• Applications are much smaller (as low as 3MB-10MB) since they rely on OS WebView.

• Lower RAM usage because there’s no full Chromium instance.

• Faster startup since it does not need to initialize a full browser engine.

• More battery-efficient since fewer background processes are needed.

Why does Tauri perform better?

• It avoids shipping a full browser engine with every app.

• Uses Rust for better CPU and memory efficiency.

• WebView is already optimized by the OS, reducing redundant resources.

Security: Which One is Safer?

Security in Electron

• Runs Node.js in the renderer process, increasing exposure to security risks.

• IPC is a major attack vector, as it allows direct communication between frontend and backend.

• Developers must manually enable/disable remote module execution, which is a common vulnerability.

Security in Tauri

• The backend is written in Rust, a memory-safe language, which eliminates many security risks.

• Provides fine-grained API permissions, allowing developers to control what can be accessed.

• WebView runs in a sandboxed environment, further reducing the attack surface.

• Tauri enforces stronger default security settings, making it harder to introduce vulnerabilities.

API & Ecosystem Differences

Electron API

• Provides built-in APIs for file system access, clipboard, notifications, and OS-level integrations.

• Uses Node.js APIs, making it easier for JavaScript developers.

• Has a larger ecosystem with many third-party plugins and extensions.

Tauri API

• Provides equivalent APIs but in Rust, offering better performance.

• Tauri limits direct system access, requiring explicit permissions for APIs.

• Uses Rust’s messaging system instead of traditional IPC.

• Supports custom Rust plugins for additional native integrations.

Example: File System Access

Electron (Node.js API)

const fs = require('fs');
fs.writeFileSync('file.txt', 'Hello World');

Tauri (Rust API with Commands)

use std::fs;

#[tauri::command]
fn write_file() {
    fs::write("file.txt", "Hello World").expect("File write failed");
}

Tauri restricts direct system access by requiring commands to be explicitly defined in the backend, making it more secure by default.

Advanced Features of Tauri

Built-in Event System

• Tauri provides an event system that allows communication between the frontend and backend.

• Developers can emit and listen for custom events, eliminating the need for additional inter-process communication (IPC) libraries.

• This event-driven architecture helps in building responsive and interactive applications with minimal latency.

Example: Emitting and listening for an event in Tauri:

Emit an Event (Rust Backend)

use tauri::Manager;

fn main() {
    tauri::Builder::default()
        .setup(|app| {
            let handle = app.handle();
            std::thread::spawn(move || {
                std::thread::sleep(std::time::Duration::from_secs(3));
                handle.emit_all("custom-event", "Data from Rust").unwrap();
            });
            Ok(())
        })
        .run(tauri::generate_context!())
        .expect("error while running tauri application");
}

Listen for an Event (Frontend)

import { listen } from '@tauri-apps/api/event';

listen('custom-event', (event) => {
  console.log('Received:', event.payload);
});

State Management in Tauri

• Tauri has built-in state management, reducing the need for external libraries like Redux or Zustand.

• The state is managed in Rust and can be accessed from the frontend via Tauri’s API.

• This allows for safer and more efficient memory handling, as Rust ensures proper allocation and deallocation of resources.

Example: Setting and retrieving state in Tauri

Define State in Rust

use tauri::State;
use std::sync::Mutex;

struct AppState {
    counter: Mutex<i32>,
}

#[tauri::command]
fn increment_counter(state: State<AppState>) -> i32 {
    let mut counter = state.counter.lock().unwrap();
    *counter += 1;
    *counter
}

fn main() {
    tauri::Builder::default()
        .manage(AppState { counter: Mutex::new(0) })
        .invoke_handler(tauri::generate_handler![increment_counter])
        .run(tauri::generate_context!())
        .expect("error while running tauri application");
}

Access State from Frontend

import { invoke } from '@tauri-apps/api/tauri';

async function increment() {
  const newCount = await invoke('increment_counter');
  console.log('Counter:', newCount);
}

By using Tauri’s built-in state management, developers can avoid unnecessary JavaScript libraries while benefiting from Rust’s memory safety and efficiency.

Code Implementation Comparison

Electron Example

const { app, BrowserWindow } = require('electron');

app.whenReady().then(() => {
  const win = new BrowserWindow({ width: 800, height: 600 });
  win.loadURL('data:text/html,<h1>Hello, World!</h1>');
});

Tauri Example

fn main() {
    tauri::Builder::default()
        .invoke_handler(tauri::generate_handler![])
        .run(tauri::generate_context!())
        .expect("error while running tauri application");
}

Tauri’s Rust-based backend allows for better memory safety and performance, while Electron depends on Chromium, leading to higher resource usage.

Migrating from Electron to Tauri

1. Install Tauri

Tauri requires Rust, so install it first:

curl --proto '=https' --tlsv1.2 -sSf https://sh.rustup.rs | sh

Then, install the Tauri CLI:

npm create tauri-app@latest

2. Move Your Frontend

Tauri supports various frontend frameworks such as React, Vue, and Svelte, so you can retain most of your UI code from an Electron project.

3. Replace Electron APIs with Tauri APIs

Since Electron relies on Node.js APIs, adjustments are required when migrating to Tauri’s Rust-based approach.

File Reading in Electron

const fs = require('fs');
fs.readFileSync('data.txt', 'utf8');

File Reading in Tauri

use std::fs;
let contents = fs::read_to_string("data.txt").expect("File read failed");

4. Build and Run the Application

npm run tauri dev

This will generate a lightweight desktop application compared to Electron.

When Should You Use Each Framework?

Use Electron if:

• Your app requires Node.js libraries.

• You need rich third-party integrations.

• Your team is already experienced with Electron.

Use Tauri if:

• You want better performance and smaller app size.

• Security is a major concern.

• You want to reduce memory consumption and startup times.

• You want to leverage Rust for backend logic.

Final Thoughts

Tauri is a promising alternative to Electron that offers significant advantages in performance, security, and resource efficiency. It provides built-in state management, an event system, and a more secure API model while maintaining a lightweight footprint.

While Electron still has a mature ecosystem and supports more Node.js features, Tauri is a more future-proof choice for applications that need high performance, low memory usage, and strong security guarantees.

For developers building modern, optimized, and secure desktop applications, Tauri is rapidly becoming the preferred choice.

- Jagadhiswaran Devaraj

📢 Stay Connected & Dive Deep into Tech!

🚀 Follow me for hardcore technical insights on JavaScript, Full-Stack Development, AI, and Scaling Systems:

🐦 X (Twitter): jags

✍️ Read more on Medium: https://medium.com/@jwaran78

💼 Connect with me on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jagadhiswaran-devaraj/

Let’s geek out over code, architecture, and all things in tech! 💡🔥