Comparison of React Libraries with Tailwind CSS: Prime React, Next UI, and Flowbite

At MarsBased, we are always at the forefront of web development technologies. In this post, we want to share a comparison of three popular libraries for working with React and Tailwind CSS: Prime React, Next UI, and Flowbite. Each of these libraries has its own advantages and disadvantages, and our experience with them has provided us with a clear view of when and how to use them best.

Prime React

Advantages:

• Complex components: Prime React stands out for its wide range of complex components that can handle various advanced functionalities without additional development. Notable examples include the Calendar and DataTable with many configuration options.
• Extensive documentation: The documentation for Prime React is detailed and covers a wide range of use cases, making the learning curve easier.

Disadvantages:

• Integration with Tailwind CSS: The integration of Tailwind CSS in Prime React is relatively recent and does not have a basic configuration layer. This means that to customize aspects such as primary colors, the entire markup must be modified.
• Limited Figma file: Although Prime React has a paid Figma file ($99), it only includes the components and not complete blocks, which can limit the speed of design. For blocks, you must use PrimeFlex, its utility library.

Flowbite

Advantages:

• Figma file in paid version: Flowbite offers a Figma file in its paid version, greatly facilitating design work thanks to example pages and predefined blocks.
• Correct customization in paid version: The customization of Flowbite's React components is adequate and allows for modifying components according to project needs, though it only has a very basic set of components.
• Predefined blocks: Flowbite has a large number of predefined blocks, similar to Tailwind UI. These are available both in Figma and HTML TailwindCSS, speeding up development and adding value by allowing quick creation of pre-designed layouts.

Disadvantages:

• Components are too basic: Flowbite mainly has very basic components, with more advanced components only available in its paid version.
• Limited documentation: Access to the React documentation must be done from a computer. Without that documentation, the web markup is HTML, requiring adaptation to JSX or TSX.
• Cost: The full version of Flowbite, which includes the Figma file and access to the basic React components, costs from $289, which can be a limitation for some projects.

Next UI

Advantages:

• Free: Both developers and designers can use it for free with the Figma file containing different components.
• Component appearance: Next UI components have a modern and attractive appearance, enhancing the end-user experience.
• Advanced customization: Next UI allows overwriting Tailwind CSS properties and offers an extra layer of customization, facilitating the adaptation of components to specific project needs and state management works through data.
• TypeScript development: Created in TypeScript, it adds static typing and improves code robustness.
• Modular component loading: Next UI components can be loaded separately, optimizing performance by avoiding unnecessary elements.
• Excellent documentation: Next UI's documentation is excellent and provides installation examples on various platforms like Next.js, Vite, Remix, and Astro.

Disadvantages:

• Less complex components: Next UI does not have some complex components like Prime React. For example, it lacks a calendar, and the table does not have the same options as Prime React's DataTable.
• Lack of predefined blocks: Unlike Flowbite, Next UI does not have predefined blocks.
• Figma file in development: Next UI's Figma file is still in development, although it already includes almost all components.

Additional considerations

Community and support:

It's important to consider the community and support available for each library. Prime React has a larger and more established community, which can be beneficial for quickly resolving issues.

Ecosystem and compatibility:

You must check the compatibility of these libraries with other tools and libraries you are using in your project. Seamless integration can save a lot of time and effort.

Performance:

You have to evaluate the impact on the performance of each library. For example, the modular loading of Next UI can be a significant advantage in large projects.

Conclusion

The choice of the right library largely depends on the specific needs of your project and your development team.

• Prime React: Excellent for projects that require complex and robust components. It allows working not only with Tailwind but also with custom CSS, adding value by allowing the creation of custom classes for all components and subcomponents. However, it is not a good option for working with Tailwind at the moment, as it lacks a good default theme with a configuration layer for basic things like colors.
• Flowbite: A good solution if you can adapt to its component design. Its paid Figma file allows for really fast work and has many examples of pages and blocks. Not very different from what Tailwind UI can provide, but the great addition is that the Figma is very complete. However, the components fall short if you need very complex things.
• Next UI: Free for both developers and designers, development feels modern with TypeScript and modular component loading. It can only be used with Tailwind CSS but is very well integrated, with a good customization layer in Tailwind CSS and good component overrides.

We hope this comparison helps you make an informed decision about which library to use in your next project with React and Tailwind CSS. Happy developing!