Server-side rendering vs static site generation: choosing the right approach

When building modern web applications, one of the most crucial decisions you'll make is how to render your content. Two popular approaches Server Side Rendering (SSR) and Static Site Generation (SSG) each offer unique advantages for different use cases.

In this comprehensive guide, we'll explore both rendering methods, compare their strengths and weaknesses, and help you decide which approach fits your project best.

🔍 What are SSR and SSG?

Before diving into comparisons, let's understand what each approach actually does:

Server Side Rendering (SSR)

SSR generates HTML on the server for each request. When a user visits your site, the server processes the page, fetches data, and sends back fully rendered HTML.

Static Site Generation (SSG)

SSG pre builds HTML pages at build time. All pages are generated once during the build process and served as static files from a CDN or web server.

⚡ How SSR works

With Server-Side Rendering, here's what happens when someone visits your page:

1. User requests a page
2. Server receives the request
3. Server fetches required data (APIs, databases)
4. Server renders the complete HTML
5. Server sends HTML to the browser
6. Browser displays the page immediately
7. JavaScript hydrates for interactivity

// Next.js SSR example
export async function getServerSideProps(context) {
  const res = await fetch(`https://api.example.com/data`);
  const data = await res.json();

  return {
    props: { data }
  };
}

🏗️ How SSG works

Static Site Generation follows a different pattern:

1. Build time: Generate all pages with data
2. Deploy: Upload static files to CDN/server
3. Runtime: Serve pre-built HTML instantly
4. Hydration: JavaScript adds interactivity

// Next.js SSG example
export async function getStaticProps() {
  const res = await fetch('https://api.example.com/posts');
  const posts = await res.json();

  return {
    props: { posts },
    revalidate: 60 // ISR: regenerate every 60 seconds
  };
}

🚀 Advantages comparison

⚠️ Disadvantages comparison

🎯 When to choose: use case comparison

🔄 Hybrid approaches

Modern frameworks like Next.js allow you to mix both approaches:

Incremental Static Regeneration (ISR)

Get SSG benefits with periodic updates:

export async function getStaticProps() {
  return {
    props: { data },
    revalidate: 3600 // Revalidate every hour
  };
}

Per-page rendering choice

Use SSG for product pages, SSR for user dashboards:

pages/
├── products/[id].tsx    → SSG with ISR
├── dashboard/           → SSR
└── blog/[slug].tsx      → Pure SSG

📊 Performance comparison

🧰 Technology recommendations

For SSR:

• Next.js with getServerSideProps
• Nuxt.js for Vue applications
• SvelteKit with server-side rendering
• Remix for React applications

For SSG:

• Next.js with getStaticProps
• Gatsby for React-based static sites
• Astro for content-focused sites
• Hugo or Jekyll for simple blogs

🔧 Implementation tips

SSR Best practices:

• Implement effective caching strategies
• Optimize database queries
• Use CDN for static assets
• Monitor server performance metrics

SSG Best practices:

• Use ISR for content that updates regularly
• Implement proper error boundaries
• Optimize build processes
• Plan for content preview workflows

✅ Decision framework

Ask yourself these questions:

• How often does your content change? (Hourly = SSR, Daily = SSG with ISR, Weekly = Pure SSG)
• Do you need personalization? (Yes = SSR, No = SSG)
• What's your expected traffic? (High = SSG, Variable = SSR)
• What's your hosting budget? (Limited = SSG, Flexible = SSR)
• How important is real-time data? (Critical = SSR, Not critical = SSG)

🧠 Conclusion

Both SSR and SSG have their place in modern web development. SSR excels at dynamic, personalized experiences with real-time data, while SSG delivers unmatched performance for content-driven sites.

The best approach often involves using both strategically—leveraging SSG for your marketing pages and blog content, while using SSR for user dashboards and dynamic features.

With frameworks like Next.js making it easy to implement both approaches, you can choose the right rendering method for each page, giving you the best of both worlds.