Comparing pnpm, npm, and Yarn for Large Projects
Introduction
Choosing the right package manager impacts install speed, disk usage, and monorepo workflows. We compare pnpm, npm, and Yarn on key metrics.
| Feature | pnpm | npm | Yarn |
|---|---|---|---|
| Install Speed | Fast (hard links, content-addressable cache) | Moderate (serial installs) | Fast (parallel installs) |
| Disk Usage | Low (shared store) | High (duplicate modules) | Medium (some dedupe) |
| Workspace Support | Built-in | Requires npm v7+ workspaces | Built-in (v1 & v2+) |
| Cache Strategy | Global content-addressable cache | Global HTTP cache | Global cache in home dir |
| Monorepo Performance | Excellent (zero-installs cache) | Adequate | Good (Plug’n’Play support) |
| Deduplication | Strict (one version per store) | Flexible | Flexible |
| Node_Modules Structure | Flat with symlinks | Nested | Flat or pnp |
| CI Integration | Faster due to cache reuse | Slower due to fresh installs | Fast with workspaces caching |
| Compatibility | Fully npm v2+ compatible | Native Node.js | Node.js & PnP |
| Community Adoption | Growing | Default in Node.js | Popular in React ecosystem |
Summary
- pnpm is ideal for large monorepos, offering fast installs and minimal disk usage.
- npm provides stability and default availability, but can be slower.
- Yarn balances speed and monorepo features, with PnP and workspaces support.
Choose based on project scale, workspace needs, and developer workflow.