Do We Really Need Server-Side Rendering?

Do We Really Need Server-Side Rendering? looks at why SSR has become popular again, what it actually does in modern frameworks, and when it helps or hurts real applications.

Server-side rendering (SSR) is now the default in frameworks like Next.js and Remix. What started as an optimization for SEO has turned into a full architectural shift. The web is moving away from pure client-side apps and back toward server-driven rendering.

That does not mean SSR is always the right choice. It is a trade-off, and in many cases it introduces more problems than it solves.

What SSR actually does

In modern frameworks, SSR means that the server runs your UI code to produce HTML before the browser ever executes JavaScript. The browser receives a page that already contains content, then downloads the JavaScript bundle and hydrates it to make the page interactive.

Next.js renders React components on the server and streams the result to the browser. Remix renders routes on the server, fetches their data, and sends a complete HTML snapshot. In both cases, the client still becomes a SPA after hydration.

When SSR is a good idea

SSR shines when the first impression matters. Public-facing pages, landing pages, e-commerce, documentation, and content-heavy sites all benefit from fast first paint and crawlable HTML.

It also works well when most of a page can be rendered from data that already exists on the server. If the server can fetch data faster than the client, it makes sense to render there.

In these cases SSR improves perceived performance, reduces time to content, and simplifies SEO without hurting the user experience.

When SSR is a bad idea

SSR becomes problematic when your app is highly interactive, highly personalized, or mostly driven by client state. Dashboards, design tools, editors, and real-time apps usually fall into this category.

In these systems the server cannot meaningfully predict what the user needs. The first render is immediately thrown away after hydration, which means SSR added latency without providing value.

SSR also increases infrastructure complexity. You now need servers that execute JavaScript, manage caching, handle streaming, and stay in sync with your client bundles. This can be more expensive and harder to operate than serving static assets.

Why the industry is still moving toward SSR

The push toward SSR is not about nostalgia for old-school web development. It is about shifting work to the place where it is cheapest and fastest. Servers are good at data access and rendering; browsers are good at interaction.

The mistake of early SPAs was forcing the browser to do everything. The mistake would now be assuming the server should do everything. The modern model is hybrid: render where it makes sense, hydrate where it matters.

SSR is a tool, not a default. Used well, it improves performance and UX. Used blindly, it becomes an expensive way to ship HTML that will be thrown away seconds later.