2020-03-05
2684
#css
Anna Monus
15206
Mar 5, 2020 â‹… 9 min read

Variable fonts: Is the performance trade-off worth it?

Anna Monus Anna is a technical writer who covers frontend frameworks, web standards, accessibility, WordPress development, UX design, and more. Head to her personal blog Annalytic for more content.

Recent posts:

When is low-code the right choice? Here’s how to decide

Not sure if low-code is right for your next project? This guide breaks down when to use it, when to avoid it, and how to make the right call.

Popoola Temitope
Jul 11, 2025 â‹… 7 min read
Comparing AI App Builders — Firebase Studio vs. Lovable vs. Replit. LogRocket Article

Comparing AI app builders — Firebase Studio vs. Lovable vs. Replit

Compare Firebase Studio, Lovable, and Replit for AI-powered app building. Find the best tool for your project needs.

Emmanuel John
Jul 11, 2025 â‹… 7 min read
Gemini CLI tutorial — Will it replace Windsurf and Cursor?

Gemini CLI tutorial — Will it replace Windsurf and Cursor?

Discover how to use Gemini CLI, Google’s new open-source AI agent that brings Gemini directly to your terminal.

Chizaram Ken
Jul 10, 2025 â‹… 8 min read
React & TypeScript: 10 Patterns For Writing Better Code

React & TypeScript: 10 patterns for writing better code

This article explores several proven patterns for writing safer, cleaner, and more readable code in React and TypeScript.

Peter Aideloje
Jul 10, 2025 â‹… 11 min read
View all posts

3 Replies to "Variable fonts: Is the performance trade-off worth it?"

  1. I’m surprised that you were only able to find one font family with both static and variable versions, when there are quite a few out there, including, but not limited to Gimlet by David Jonathan Ross, Oswald hosted by Google fonts, and Zeitung by Underware.

    Not all variable fonts are created equally. Some are created with a much better emphasis on file size. I was shocked when you mentioned the huge size for Roboto variable, since this is not the normal for variable fonts. I have seen many under 100kb. Here’s an article here that shows how the Gimlet variable font is smaller in size than the static alternative (http://stuff.djr.com/gimlet-vf-size-test/).

    So by using only a single example of a font family that is out of the norm for file size, it can give a very misleading impression on the performance of variable fonts.

  2. > The first contentful paint took just 1.2s, down from 1.6s, a 25 percent improvement. Consequently, Lighthouse’s performance score is also a bit higher: 100 instead of 99. This is most likely because Google Fonts runs a few checks to decide which font format/file to load, while our self-hosted CSS contains static file paths.

    There is definitely a performance hit to using Google Fonts. See here: https://www.tunetheweb.com/blog/should-you-self-host-google-fonts/

    Good post though. Seems to me variable font makers need to be careful how many axis’s they add. If Roboto used italic (one variant which is on or off) rather than slant (12 variants with full range) would it be smaller? Also dropping wdth would also presumably make it up to a third smaller?

  3. I presume the Lighthouse First Contentful Paint (FCP) is larger than the GTMetrix Fully Loaded Time (FLT) because Lighthouse was set to simulate a slow mobile connection. But, why does the “Bonus Test Case” do so badly on the Lighthouse FCP (relative to Test cases 2 and 3) but not on the GTMetrix FLT?

Leave a Reply