babylonjs
Version 8.55.1
* We recommend using the [Core ES6-supported version](https://www.npmjs.com/package/@babylonjs/core);
- Weekly Downloads
- 12.8K
- Bundle (gzip)
- 17.8 MB
- Updated
- Vulns
- 0
Side-by-side NPM package comparison
Version 8.55.1
* We recommend using the [Core ES6-supported version](https://www.npmjs.com/package/@babylonjs/core);
Version 0.183.2
JavaScript 3D library
Choosing between Babylonjs and Three? Here's a data-driven comparison based on real npm data — downloads, bundle size, health scores, and more — to help you decide which package fits your project best.
Three leads with 5.5M weekly downloads — roughly 433.7x more. Babylonjs has 12.8K weekly downloads. Higher download counts generally indicate broader community adoption and a larger ecosystem of tutorials, plugins, and support.
Three has the smallest gzipped bundle at 175.2 KB. Babylonjs comes in at 17.8 MB. A smaller bundle size means faster page loads, which improves user experience and Core Web Vitals scores.
Three has an overall health score of 85/100 (very good), with strong maintenance, security, popularity scores. Babylonjs has an overall health score of 77/100 (very good), with strong maintenance, security scores. Health scores are calculated from maintenance activity, code quality, security posture, popularity, and stability metrics.
Choose Babylonjs if you value actively maintained, strong security track record. Choose Three if you value large community support, actively maintained, strong security track record.
Both Babylonjs and Three are solid choices for JavaScript development. Three has the edge in overall health score (85/100), while each package brings unique strengths to the table. Evaluate them based on your project's priorities — whether that's community size, bundle efficiency, or maintenance activity — and choose the one that aligns best with your requirements.
Get the latest package insights, npm trends, and tooling tips delivered to your inbox.