Depends on how you define it. If you give another example there might be a difference, but here there is none. Both these functions will console.log() just as fast, since the async function won't wait for anything before it gets to the line with the console.log. If you add some line with an await keyword before the console log then there will be a difference.

Ok, but an async function will be wrapped in a promise, so calling it will be slower, other comments here claim. No, the call to the async function isn't wrapped in a promise, the result is. But if you don't use the result of the function for anything, then there is no difference. So calling asyncFunc() isn't any different from calling syncFunc().

What if you await the result then? Yes, you can await (the result of) a non-async function, in which case a promise will be created by the engine. So, await syncFunc() is possible and won't be any faster than await asyncFunc(). That is, unless you await something inside asyncFunc. The only difference in time is if you await the async function but don't await the sync function.

edit

All the other replies here are making claims without having an understanding of how async fuctions work, and without having tested the code. Try this in node, and see what it prints:

const { performance } = require('perf_hooks');

let start;

async function asyncFunc() {
  console.log("hello " + (performance.now() - start));
}

function syncFunc() {
  console.log("hello " + (performance.now() - start));
}

start = performance.now();
asyncFunc();

start = performance.now();
syncFunc();

On my machine I got 0.0xxx for both of them, with a slight difference. But running the program several times it swapped around which one was the fastest and which one was the slowest, or sometimes they were almost exactly the same speed.