Yes agree. It will depend on the developer who is writing code :).
This is a vague question. MVC is actually an architectural pattern where as ASP.NET is a framework to develop web applications.
Go for MVC, MVC makes faster and light weight applications..Because Maximum use of Html controls(Doesnt use server side controls like asp.net ) and Client Side Scripting(Jquery,javascript) for event handling and some other purpose.Thats the reason MVC applications are faster and light weight..
It's not depend on user, obviously MVC is more faster than Web Forms, b'cause its light weight.If you know your stuff and are confident in your ability to work "close to the metal" (as it were) I would imagine that you could build a faster website using ASP.NET MVC since you would be able to optimize your site to have as little overhead as possible. However it is more than possible to build a very fast site using standard ASP.NET as well so it really depends on exactly on the requirements of your project.
ok All answer i Accepted but why we need MVC if performance are equal.
This depends on many factors, We should consider our project size, architecture design , database and way to doing code. Both are faster. MVC is pattern. We can use MVC pattern in any language such as JAVA, C#, PHP etc. We can do rapid development in normal web form(quickly design form, apply form design, code). Maintenance wise, MVC pattern might help you.
MVC is much more faster as compared to Asp.net
MVC makes faster because it is light weight and ASP .NET web forms uses page controller pattern approach for rendering layout. In this approach every page has its own controller i.e code behind file that processes the request. On the other hand ASP .NET MVC uses front controller approach in this approach a common controller for all pages ,processes the requests.
Mvc Is faster than Asp.Net,Because of Asp.Net Have In-Built Server side controls,so it burden the server,where as in MVC No server side controls
MVC Is faster than ASP .net MVC architecture is traingular
In terms of Page Life Cycle , MVC is fast.
faster in terms of what?
MVC
Using web form we can develop complex UI rapidly. people often complain for viewstate but viewstate was life saver in webform. due to viewstate people can develop complex UI and could handle full page post back without worrying about look & feel or selection persistence. if anyone want to develop complex UI with mvc then they must face one problem for persist data during full postback. in mvc people has to use javascript/ ajax etc to handle complex situation where webform can handle it without using any ajax like funda. if people develop same UI with webform and mvc with full postback then i guess webform developer will get benefit because everything would be wrapped up in viewstate on the other hand MVC developer has to write many extra code to handle the situation. what is other suggestion regarding this.
Asp.net MVC is faster.
Well, it depends upon the situation.
mvc
MVC is basically used for seperation of code, speed of application depends on architecture of your application and database procedure optimization.
It depends on what kind of site you want to build and your knowledge and experience creating websites.
asp.net
MVC cause as we know that we dont have event in MVC so each time a request come to MVC it wont go for entire ASP.Net page life cycle process. Each controller is significantly designed for each action (method call) and render to respective view.
MVC is faster than tradition n tier architecture. As it use maximum HTML controls and its more decoupled. But performance of any application depends on application and database architecture. if both are designed in good way then surely application will be more responsive in terms of performance
There are various positive points to moving towards MVC1. TDD support out of the box as most of the design is based on interfaces. 2. SEO friendly URL by design (though now this is possible in ASP.NET 4 as well) 3. No ViewState (this may seem a bit of moving backward to some), but overall a good design decision. 4. Clean View Markup (no additional HTML emitted) 5. 100% extensible. You can add your own controller with IOC, switch view engines at will, control model binding at wish etc. 6. Rich UI support (possible through client side JS libraries like jQuery UI and others). Telerik has released some controls for MVC which includes Grid control as well (which are merely HTMLHelpers) 7. Session, JS, Ajax works. Validation is even more powerful with DataAnnotations and jquery. 8. Is MVC faster? Yes by default because of lack of viewstate and clean markup. But performance is subject and MVC by design is more performant that traditional ASP.NET webforms (though webforms can be made as fast as required. 9. Out of the box support for mitigating antiforgery attacks and XSS vulnerability (though asp.net does has this to some extent) 10. Out of the box minimal IOC support. 11. Full control over rendered HTML 12. Pluggable architecture 13. And much more....Couple of limitations (though not exactly) 1. Learning curve as most asp.net developers are used to windows form model for web development.NOTE: Webforms is not bad. But by design it encourages many bad practices. A webform at the hands of careful developer is as or could be even more productive than MVC. Just my thought.Additional readings at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dd942833.aspx https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/864950/ASP-NET-MVC-vs-ASP-NET-WebForm-performance-compariHope this helps.
Yes,MVC is much more faster than ASP.net because of so many reasons..
Web forms has extra overhead to manage session like view state, hidden filed, but it totally depend on your requirement, we could make very fast in asp.net as well, But I would prefer MVC
If the technology is not used in proper way both framework will be slow and worst.MVC is light weight and faster that ASP web forms, mvc is easy for maintenance and deploying.
Yes,MVC is faster than ASP.NET but it depends on the developer who is going to use.
MVC Faster
Asp.Net MVC is faster as compared asp.net web form
mvc is faster as compared to asp.net because it reduce complexity.
Refer this link: http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/528117/WebForms-vs-MVC
Hi Mr. Vithal Wadje Nice Question So Many of beginner's don't know about this so its nice, Here MVC is a Pattern available on ASP.NET ,PHP and in JAVA , of Course MVC is Faster than ASP.Net Due to HTML and JavaScript is Main Part here there to develop ( "MVC" ) but in ASP.Net We Need Code file to Perform Operation for e.g : Insert,Update and Delete also. and the Main Difference is for Small Kind of Application ASP.Net is Better For a Big Kind of Application MVC is Better
MVC is faster than the asp.net
In some cases MVC are faster than traditional ASP .net. If we are not using 3-tier architecture in asp.net, we are writing each and every process and method call in code-behind. In that case asp.net application will go slow. If you want to make an asp .net application faster then use different aspx page for every function like edit, update and delete same as different view in MVC application and follow a 3-tier archetecture. So page will not get too much heavy and its performance will be faster as like MVC application
i thin both having same performance. Both MVC and ASP.Net having same speed.
MVC is more faster than asp.net. Because lack of viewstate and clean markup. But performance is subject and MVC by design is more performant that traditional ASP.NET webforms (though webforms can be made as fast as required. Rich UI support . etc.
In real world MVC design pattern is faster than ASP.NET WebForms applications. Separating layers, Using Client side validations, Ajax requests plus using of unobtrusive JavaScript. All of that make out application with MVC more Faster,scalable and maintainable. That make MVC is Faster. But Also we can all achieve that With asp.net but that will take more time.
f
MVC since no view state.
http://forums.asp.net/t/1762418.aspx?Which+is+fast+MVC+or+asp+net+Webform+
That depend on developer. Both will give good performance,