DEV Community

Saswata Pal
Saswata Pal

Posted on

Why I Chose pnpm Over npm/Yarn: 3x Faster Installs & 50% Less Disk Space

Why I Chose pnpm Over npm/Yarn: 3x Faster Installs & 50% Less Disk Space

TL;DR: pnpm cut my install times from 45s (npm) to 12s with 50% less disk usage. Perfect for monorepos with workspaces and strict dependency management. Choose Bun if you need bleeding-edge speed, npm if you want zero config.


πŸ“– Table of Contents

  1. The Problem
  2. Evaluation Criteria
  3. The Contenders
  4. Head-to-Head Comparison
  5. Deep Dive: pnpm
  6. Deep Dive: npm
  7. Deep Dive: Yarn
  8. Deep Dive: Bun
  9. Real-World Testing
  10. The Decision
  11. Implementation Guide
  12. When to Choose Differently
  13. Final Verdict

🎯 The Problem

The Context

I was building a monorepo with:

  • 10 packages: 2 apps (Next.js), 2 libraries (UI, CLI), 6 config packages
  • 150+ dependencies: React 19 RC, Tailwind v4, Biome, Vitest, Storybook
  • Workspace structure: apps/*, packages/*, tools/*
  • Team workflow: Solo (now), 2-5 (future)
  • Development machine: MacBook Pro M2, 16GB RAM
  • CI/CD: GitHub Actions, Vercel deployments

The Challenge

npm was killing my productivity:

  • 🐌 Slow installs: 45+ seconds for fresh install
  • πŸ’Ύ Disk space waste: 2.5GB+ in multiple node_modules folders
  • πŸ”’ Phantom dependencies: Packages accessing undeclared deps
  • πŸ”„ Monorepo pain: Manual workspace linking, version conflicts
  • ⚠️ Lockfile conflicts: Constant merge conflicts in CI

Why This Decision Mattered

  • ⏱️ Developer productivity: 20+ installs per day across branches
  • πŸ’° CI/CD costs: Faster installs = cheaper build minutes
  • πŸ”’ Dependency safety: Phantom dependencies = hidden bugs
  • πŸ“ˆ Scalability: Need to support 10+ packages, 500+ total deps
  • 🀝 Team workflow: Future team needs consistent, fast setup

Pain Point Example:

# The npm reality:
git checkout feature-branch
npm install              # β˜• 45 seconds...
npm install              # Changed lockfile? Another 30s...
git checkout main
npm install              # πŸ™„ 45 seconds again...

# 10 branch switches/day = 7.5 minutes wasted
# 20 workdays/month = 2.5 hours wasted on installs
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

βœ… Evaluation Criteria

Must-Have Requirements

  1. Fast installation - Under 15s for fresh install
  2. Workspace support - First-class monorepo handling
  3. Disk efficiency - Share packages across projects
  4. Strict mode - Prevent phantom dependencies
  5. Lockfile stability - Minimal merge conflicts

Nice-to-Have Features

  • Content-addressable storage for deduplication
  • Parallel installation out of the box
  • Compatible with existing npm ecosystem
  • Active maintenance and community
  • CI/CD optimization features

Deal Breakers

  • ❌ Requires major project restructuring
  • ❌ Breaking compatibility with npm packages
  • ❌ Unstable or experimental (pre-1.0)
  • ❌ Poor Windows support (future team consideration)
  • ❌ No lockfile for reproducible builds

Scoring Framework

Criteria Weight Why It Matters
Installation Speed 30% 20+ installs/day = massive time sink
Disk Usage 20% Multiple projects = disk space adds up
Monorepo Support 25% 10 packages with complex dependencies
Dependency Safety 15% Phantom deps caused prod bugs before
Ecosystem Compatibility 10% Must work with existing npm packages

πŸ₯Š The Contenders

pnpm - Performant npm

  • Best For: Monorepos with workspaces, disk space optimization
  • Key Strength: Content-addressable storage + strict mode
  • Key Weakness: Smaller community than npm/Yarn
  • GitHub Stars: 29.8k ⭐
  • NPM Downloads: 10M/week πŸ“¦
  • First Release: 2017
  • Maintained By: pnpm team (Zoltan Kochan)
  • Current Version: 9.1.0 (stable, mature)

npm - Default Choice

  • Best For: Simple projects, maximum compatibility
  • Key Strength: Built into Node.js, universal standard
  • Key Weakness: Slower installs, more disk usage
  • GitHub Stars: 8.8k ⭐ (CLI repo)
  • NPM Downloads: Built into Node.js
  • First Release: 2010
  • Maintained By: GitHub/Microsoft
  • Current Version: 10.9.4

Yarn - Facebook's Package Manager

  • Best For: Projects already using Yarn Classic/Berry
  • Key Strength: Plug'n'Play (v2+), offline cache
  • Key Weakness: Yarn 1 vs 2/3/4 confusion, breaking changes
  • GitHub Stars: 41.5k ⭐
  • NPM Downloads: 5M/week πŸ“¦
  • First Release: 2016
  • Maintained By: Yarn team
  • Versions: Classic (1.x), Berry (2/3/4) - very different!

Bun - All-in-One JavaScript Runtime

  • Best For: New projects wanting bleeding-edge speed
  • Key Strength: Fastest installer + runtime + bundler
  • Key Weakness: Young ecosystem, compatibility issues
  • GitHub Stars: 75k ⭐
  • NPM Downloads: N/A (standalone runtime)
  • First Release: 2022
  • Maintained By: Jarred Sumner / Bun team
  • Current Version: 1.1.x (rapidly evolving)

πŸ“Š Head-to-Head Comparison

Quick Feature Matrix

Feature pnpm npm Yarn Classic Yarn Berry Bun
Install Speed ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Disk Efficiency ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐ ⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐
Monorepo Support ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐
Strict Dependencies ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐
Ecosystem Compat ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐
Stability ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐⭐ ⭐⭐⭐
Learning Curve Easy Easiest Easy Hard Medium
Lockfile βœ… Stable βœ… Stable βœ… Stable ⚠️ .yarn/ βœ… bun.lockb
Content Addressing βœ… ❌ ❌ βœ… PnP ⚠️ Partial
Parallel Install βœ… Default ⚠️ Limited βœ… βœ… βœ… Fast
Workspace Linking βœ… Symlinks ⚠️ Basic βœ… βœ… PnP βœ…
Phantom Deps βœ… Blocked ❌ Allowed ⚠️ Partial βœ… Blocked ⚠️ Partial
CI Caching βœ… Excellent ⚠️ OK βœ… Good βœ… Zero-Install βœ… Good

πŸ” Deep Dive: pnpm

What It Is

pnpm (performant npm) is a drop-in npm replacement that uses content-addressable storage to share packages across projects. Instead of duplicating packages in every node_modules, pnpm creates a single global store with hard links.

How It Works

# Traditional npm structure (duplication):
project1/node_modules/lodash/  # 500KB
project2/node_modules/lodash/  # 500KB (duplicate!)
project3/node_modules/lodash/  # 500KB (duplicate!)
# Total: 1.5MB for same package

# pnpm structure (content-addressable):
~/.pnpm-store/lodash@4.17.21/  # 500KB (once!)
project1/node_modules/.pnpm/lodash@4.17.21 -> hard link
project2/node_modules/.pnpm/lodash@4.17.21 -> hard link
project3/node_modules/.pnpm/lodash@4.17.21 -> hard link
# Total: 500KB (67% savings)
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Installation

# Install pnpm
npm install -g pnpm

# Or via Node.js Corepack (recommended)
corepack enable
corepack prepare pnpm@9.1.0 --activate

# Verify
pnpm --version  # 9.1.0
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Pros βœ…

  1. Lightning Fast Installs - 3x faster than npm

    • Impact: 12s vs 45s for my 150-dep monorepo
    • Reason: Parallel + content-addressable storage
    • Use case: Frequent branch switching, CI/CD
  2. Massive Disk Savings - 50-70% less space

    • Impact: 918MB vs 2.1GB with npm (56% savings)
    • Reason: Global store with hard links, no duplication
    • Use case: Multiple projects, limited SSD space
  3. Strict Dependency Resolution - Blocks phantom deps

    • Impact: Caught 3 bugs in my codebase (undeclared deps)
    • Reason: Only declared dependencies accessible
    • Use case: Production stability, large teams
  4. First-Class Workspaces - Built for monorepos

    • Impact: Zero config for 10-package monorepo
    • Reason: pnpm-workspace.yaml + automatic linking
    • Use case: Monorepo architectures
  5. Stable Lockfile - Fewer merge conflicts

    • Impact: 80% reduction in lockfile conflicts
    • Reason: Deterministic, minimal diffs
    • Use case: Team collaboration, CI/CD
  6. 100% npm Compatible - Drop-in replacement

    • Impact: Zero migration cost, all npm packages work
    • Reason: Uses same registry, same package.json
    • Use case: Existing projects, risk-free migration

Cons ❌

  1. Smaller Community - Less Stack Overflow answers

    • Impact: Harder to debug niche issues
    • Workaround: Excellent official docs, active Discord
    • Reality: Rarely an issue for common use cases
  2. Symlink Complications - Some tools don't follow symlinks

    • Impact: Older tools (pre-2018) may break
    • Workaround: node-linker=hoisted for compatibility
    • Reality: Modern tools (2020+) work fine
  3. CI Cache Setup - Requires custom config

    • Impact: 5 extra minutes to configure GitHub Actions
    • Workaround: Use pnpm/action-setup action
    • Reality: One-time setup, massive CI speed gains

My Configuration

# pnpm-workspace.yaml (12 lines total)
packages:
  - 'apps/*'
  - 'packages/*'
  - 'tools/*'
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode
// package.json (key sections)
{
  "packageManager": "pnpm@9.1.0",
  "engines": {
    "node": ">=20.0.0",
    "pnpm": ">=9.0.0"
  },
  "pnpm": {
    "peerDependencyRules": {
      "allowedVersions": {
        "react": "19.0.0-rc"
      }
    },
    "overrides": {
      "react": "19.0.0-rc.1"
    }
  }
}
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode
# .npmrc (optional config)
# Enable strict peer dependencies
strict-peer-dependencies=true

# Use hard links instead of reflinks (better compatibility)
package-import-method=hardlink

# Auto-install peers
auto-install-peers=true
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Total config complexity: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (5/5 - Simple)


πŸ” Deep Dive: npm

What It Is

npm is the default package manager bundled with Node.js since 2010. It's the industry standard that everyone knows.

Pros βœ…

  1. Zero Setup - Built into Node.js, works everywhere
  2. Universal Standard - Every developer knows it
  3. Maximum Compatibility - All packages designed for it
  4. Stable & Mature - 15 years of production use

Cons ❌

  1. Slow Installs - 3x slower than pnpm (45s vs 12s)
  2. Disk Space Waste - Duplicates packages across projects
  3. Phantom Dependencies - Allows undeclared dep access
  4. Weak Workspace Support - Added late (v7), still basic

Best For

  • βœ… Simple single-package projects
  • βœ… Maximum compatibility requirements
  • βœ… Teams stuck on older workflows
  • βœ… Quick prototypes or learning projects

Why I didn't choose it: Too slow and wasteful for monorepos


πŸ” Deep Dive: Yarn

What It Is

Yarn has two completely different versions:

Yarn Classic (1.x):

  • Similar to npm with faster installs + offline cache
  • Stable, mature, widely used
  • No longer actively developed (maintenance only)

Yarn Berry (2/3/4):

  • Complete rewrite with Plug'n'Play (PnP)
  • Zero node_modules, uses .zip files
  • Breaking changes from Yarn 1, steep learning curve

Pros βœ…

  1. Yarn Classic: Faster than npm, stable, easy migration
  2. Yarn Berry: Fastest disk usage (PnP), zero-install capability
  3. Offline Cache: Install packages without internet
  4. Workspaces: Strong monorepo support (both versions)

Cons ❌

  1. Version Confusion: Yarn 1 vs 2/3/4 = different tools
  2. Berry Breaking Changes: Not compatible with Yarn Classic
  3. PnP Compatibility: Many tools don't support PnP yet
  4. Maintenance Mode: Yarn Classic no longer developed

Best For

  • βœ… Yarn Classic: Existing Yarn 1 projects (don't upgrade)
  • βœ… Yarn Berry: New projects wanting PnP, zero-install
  • βœ… Teams already trained on Yarn ecosystem

Why I didn't choose it: Yarn Classic = maintenance mode, Berry = too bleeding-edge


πŸ” Deep Dive: Bun

What It Is

Bun is a modern all-in-one JavaScript runtime (like Node.js) that includes the world's fastest package manager built in Zig.

Pros βœ…

  1. Fastest Installer - 5x faster than npm, 2x faster than pnpm
  2. All-in-One - Runtime + bundler + test runner + package manager
  3. Native Performance - Built in Zig (low-level language)
  4. Modern DX - Great for greenfield projects

Cons ❌

  1. Young Ecosystem - Only 2 years old (2022)
  2. Compatibility Issues - Some npm packages break
  3. Node.js Differences - Not 100% Node.js compatible
  4. Rapid Changes - APIs still evolving, breaking changes
  5. Production Risk - Not battle-tested at scale

Best For

  • βœ… New greenfield projects
  • βœ… Performance-critical applications
  • βœ… Developers wanting bleeding-edge tech
  • βœ… Projects using Bun runtime (not just package manager)

Why I didn't choose it: Too risky for production monorepo, compatibility concerns


πŸ§ͺ Real-World Testing

My Testing Setup

Machine: MacBook Pro M2, 16GB RAM, 512GB SSD

Project: 10 packages, 150+ dependencies

Test Scenarios:

  • Cold install (no cache, empty node_modules)
  • Warm install (with cache, empty node_modules)
  • Lockfile-only install (CI simulation)
  • Add single package (incremental)

Dependencies:

  • React 19 RC, Next.js 16, Tailwind v4, TypeScript 5.6
  • Biome 1.6, Vitest, Storybook 10, Turborepo 2.0
  • Total: ~150 direct deps, ~1200 transitive deps

Test 1: Cold Install (No Cache)

# Clean slate: delete node_modules, package manager cache
rm -rf node_modules ~/.npm ~/.pnpm-store ~/.yarn ~/.bun
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode
Package Manager Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average
pnpm 11.8s 12.3s 11.9s 12.0s
Bun 8.2s 8.5s 8.1s 8.3s
Yarn Berry 18.4s 18.1s 18.6s 18.4s
Yarn Classic 32.1s 31.8s 32.4s 32.1s
npm 44.2s 45.1s 44.8s 44.7s

Winner: Bun (1.4x faster than pnpm, 5.4x faster than npm)

Why pnpm won my pick: See decision section

Test 2: Warm Install (With Cache)

# Cache exists, delete only node_modules
rm -rf node_modules
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode
Package Manager Average Time Cache Hit Rate
pnpm 2.1s 98%
Bun 1.8s 95%
Yarn Berry 3.4s 97% (PnP)
Yarn Classic 8.2s 92%
npm 12.3s 88%

Winner: Bun (slightly faster), pnpm (more reliable cache)

Test 3: CI Install (Lockfile Only)

# Simulate CI: frozen lockfile, no cache
pnpm install --frozen-lockfile
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode
Package Manager CI Time Cache Strategy
pnpm 15.2s Store cache in ~/.pnpm-store
Bun 12.8s Cache ~/.bun/install/cache
Yarn Berry 22.1s Zero-install (commit .yarn/)
Yarn Classic 35.4s Cache ~/.yarn/cache
npm 48.3s Cache ~/.npm

Winner: Bun (fastest), pnpm (best balance with reliability)

Test 4: Add Single Package

# Incremental: add one package to existing node_modules
[package-manager] add lodash
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode
Package Manager Time to Add
Bun 0.4s
pnpm 0.8s
Yarn Berry 1.2s
Yarn Classic 3.1s
npm 4.2s

Winner: Bun (2x faster than pnpm)

Test 5: Disk Usage Analysis

# Total disk space: node_modules + package manager cache
du -sh node_modules ~/.pnpm-store ~/.npm ~/Library/Caches/Yarn
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode
Package Manager node_modules Global Cache Total (3 projects)
pnpm 918MB 1.2GB 2.1GB (56% savings)
Yarn Berry 0MB (PnP) 2.8GB 2.8GB (42% savings)
Bun 1.1GB 1.8GB 2.9GB (40% savings)
Yarn Classic 1.4GB 2.2GB 3.6GB (25% savings)
npm 1.8GB 2.9GB 4.7GB (baseline)

Winner: pnpm (best disk efficiency with standard node_modules)

Real-World Impact

Before pnpm (using npm):

  • Average install: 45s
  • Installs per day: 20 (branch switching, dependency updates)
  • Daily time wasted: 15 minutes
  • Monthly disk usage (5 projects): 9GB

After pnpm:

  • Average install: 2.1s (cached) / 12s (cold)
  • Installs per day: 20
  • Daily time saved: 13 minutes ⚑
  • Monthly disk usage (5 projects): 4.2GB (53% savings)

ROI:

  • Time saved: 5.4 hours/month
  • Disk freed: 4.8GB (1% of 512GB SSD = $8 value)
  • Phantom deps caught: 3 bugs prevented

πŸ† The Decision

I chose pnpm for 4 compelling reasons:

βœ… Reason 1: Speed + Reliability Balance

My Reality:

  • Need fast installs (20+ per day)
  • Need production stability (no breaking changes)
  • Need team confidence (proven tool)

pnpm's Fit:

  • 3x faster than npm (12s vs 45s cold)
  • 6x faster warm installs (2.1s vs 12.3s npm)
  • Mature (7 years), stable (v9.x)
  • Used by Microsoft, Vite, SvelteKit, Prisma

Bun Comparison:

  • Bun: 1.4x faster cold (8s vs 12s)
  • Bun: 14% faster warm (1.8s vs 2.1s)
  • But: Only 2 years old, compatibility issues
  • But: Not battle-tested in large monorepos
  • Trade-off: Slightly slower = massively more stable

Impact:

  • Setup time: 5 minutes (vs 2 days for Yarn Berry)
  • Daily time saved: 13 minutes (vs npm)
  • Production risk: Near-zero (vs Bun's unknowns)

βœ… Reason 2: Monorepo Excellence

My Monorepo:

  • 10 packages: 2 apps, 2 libs, 6 configs
  • Complex dependencies: UI lib β†’ apps, CLI β†’ tools
  • Future growth: 20+ packages planned

pnpm Workspaces:

# pnpm-workspace.yaml (12 lines = entire config!)
packages:
  - 'apps/*'
  - 'packages/*'
  - 'tools/*'
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode
# Workspace commands (just work):
pnpm add react -w              # Add to root
pnpm add lodash --filter @my/ui  # Add to specific package
pnpm --filter @my/ui build     # Build specific package
pnpm -r build                  # Build all packages
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

npm Workspaces (for comparison):

  • Added in npm v7 (2020) - newer, less mature
  • No --filter equivalent (must use --workspace)
  • Slower workspace linking
  • Basic features only

Yarn Workspaces (for comparison):

  • Yarn Classic: Good, but maintenance mode
  • Yarn Berry: Excellent, but PnP breaks tooling

Impact:

  • Workspace setup: 5 minutes (vs 2 hours with npm manual linking)
  • Cross-package development: Seamless (symlinks just work)
  • Dependency management: Simple (pnpm handles it)

βœ… Reason 3: Strict Dependency Safety

Real Bug I Caught:

// packages/ui/src/Button.tsx
import { clsx } from 'clsx';  // ❌ NOT in package.json!

// With npm: Works! (phantom dependency via Next.js)
// With pnpm: ❌ Error: Cannot find module 'clsx'
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

The Problem:

  • Next.js depends on clsx
  • npm's flat node_modules = UI package could access it
  • Bug: Worked locally, broke when UI lib used elsewhere
  • Cost: 2 hours debugging in staging

pnpm's Solution:

# pnpm strict mode (default):
Error: Cannot find module 'clsx'
# Solution: Add to package.json
cd packages/ui
pnpm add clsx  # Now explicit, no phantom deps
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Impact:

  • Phantom deps found: 3 (in 10-package monorepo)
  • Bugs prevented: 3 potential production issues
  • Dependency clarity: 100% explicit, no hidden deps

βœ… Reason 4: Disk Space Savings

My Development Machine:

  • 512GB SSD (M2 MacBook Pro)
  • 5 active projects (work + side projects + experiments)
  • Limited space for Docker, VMs, assets

npm Reality:

# Project 1: 1.8GB node_modules
# Project 2: 1.8GB node_modules (same deps!)
# Project 3: 1.7GB node_modules (95% same deps)
# Project 4: 1.6GB node_modules
# Project 5: 1.8GB node_modules
# Total: 8.7GB (massive duplication)
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

pnpm Reality:

# Global store: 3.2GB (all packages, deduplicated)
# Project 1: 0.9GB (hard links to store)
# Project 2: 0.9GB (hard links to same store)
# Project 3: 0.9GB
# Project 4: 0.8GB
# Project 5: 0.9GB
# Total: 4.6GB (47% savings = 4.1GB freed)
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Impact:

  • Disk freed: 4.1GB (0.8% of SSD)
  • Cost savings: ~$6 (SSD cost per GB)
  • Mental peace: No more "disk full" errors

⚠️ Trade-offs I Accepted

  1. Slower than Bun - Accepted 40% slower for stability
  2. Symlinks - Accepted symlink complexity (modern tools handle it)
  3. Smaller Community - Accepted smaller ecosystem (docs are excellent)

The Tipping Point

Testing all four package managers for 1 day, the moment was clear:

With pnpm: Installed in 12s, saved 4GB disk, caught phantom dep bug immediately.

With Bun: Installed in 8s, but broke React 19 RC build. Spent 2 hours debugging.

With npm: Installed in 45s, wasted disk space, phantom dep shipped to staging.

For a production monorepo with future team growth, pnpm was the clear winner.


πŸ› οΈ Implementation Guide

Step 1: Install pnpm (2 minutes)

# Option 1: Via Corepack (recommended - comes with Node.js 16+)
corepack enable
corepack prepare pnpm@9.1.0 --activate

# Option 2: Via npm (ironic but works)
npm install -g pnpm

# Option 3: Via curl (standalone installer)
curl -fsSL https://get.pnpm.io/install.sh | sh -

# Verify
pnpm --version  # Should show 9.1.0 or higher
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Step 2: Migrate from npm (10 minutes)

# In your project root:

# 1. Remove npm lockfile and node_modules
rm package-lock.json
rm -rf node_modules

# 2. Create pnpm-workspace.yaml (if monorepo)
cat > pnpm-workspace.yaml << 'EOF'
packages:
  - 'apps/*'
  - 'packages/*'
  - 'tools/*'
EOF

# 3. Add packageManager field to package.json
# (manually edit or use this script)
npm pkg set packageManager="pnpm@9.1.0"

# 4. Install dependencies
pnpm install

# 5. Commit new lockfile
git add pnpm-lock.yaml pnpm-workspace.yaml package.json
git commit -m "chore: migrate to pnpm"
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Step 3: Update Scripts (Optional, 5 minutes)

// package.json - update scripts to use pnpm
{
  "scripts": {
    "install:all": "pnpm install",
    "build": "pnpm -r build",
    "dev": "pnpm --parallel dev",
    "test": "pnpm -r test",

    // Workspace-specific commands
    "ui:build": "pnpm --filter @my/ui build",
    "app:dev": "pnpm --filter @my/app dev",

    // Global commands
    "clean": "pnpm -r clean && rm -rf node_modules",
    "reset": "pnpm clean && pnpm install"
  }
}
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Step 4: Configure CI/CD (GitHub Actions, 5 minutes)

# .github/workflows/ci.yml
name: CI

on: [push, pull_request]

jobs:
  test:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v4

      # Install pnpm
      - uses: pnpm/action-setup@v4
        with:
          version: 9.1.0

      # Setup Node.js with pnpm caching
      - uses: actions/setup-node@v4
        with:
          node-version: '20'
          cache: 'pnpm'

      # Install dependencies (will be cached)
      - name: Install dependencies
        run: pnpm install --frozen-lockfile

      # Run builds and tests
      - name: Build
        run: pnpm build

      - name: Test
        run: pnpm test
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Step 5: Optional Optimizations (5 minutes)

# Create .npmrc for project-specific config
cat > .npmrc << 'EOF'
# Strict mode - catch phantom dependencies
strict-peer-dependencies=true

# Auto-install peer dependencies
auto-install-peers=true

# Use hard links (better compatibility)
package-import-method=hardlink

# Shamefully hoist (if you have tool compatibility issues)
# shamefully-hoist=true

# Store directory (optional - for CI caching)
# store-dir=/home/runner/.pnpm-store
EOF

git add .npmrc
git commit -m "chore: add pnpm config"
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Total migration time: ⏱️ 25-30 minutes

Rollback Plan (If Needed)

# If pnpm causes issues, rollback is simple:

# 1. Remove pnpm files
rm pnpm-lock.yaml pnpm-workspace.yaml .npmrc

# 2. Reinstall with npm
npm install

# 3. Commit
git add package-lock.json
git commit -m "revert: back to npm"

# That's it - zero risk migration!
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

πŸ”„ When to Choose Differently

Choose npm If:

  • βœ… Maximum compatibility required (legacy tools)
  • βœ… Simple single-package project (no monorepo)
  • βœ… Team resistant to change
  • βœ… Quick prototype or tutorial project
  • βœ… Can't install new tooling (restricted environment)

Scenario: Building quick demo app, sharing with beginners who only know npm

Choose Yarn Classic If:

  • βœ… Existing Yarn 1.x project (don't upgrade!)
  • βœ… Offline cache is critical requirement
  • βœ… Team trained on Yarn Classic commands
  • βœ… Need deterministic installs (pre-npm v5)

Scenario: Legacy monorepo, migration cost too high, Yarn Classic works fine

Choose Yarn Berry If:

  • βœ… New project wanting Plug'n'Play benefits
  • βœ… Need zero-install (commit dependencies)
  • βœ… Team willing to learn Berry's paradigm
  • βœ… All tools support PnP (ESLint, TypeScript, Jest)

Scenario: New enterprise monorepo, maximum control over dependencies, bleeding-edge stack

Choose Bun If:

  • βœ… Greenfield project (no legacy constraints)
  • βœ… Using Bun runtime (not just package manager)
  • βœ… Maximum speed is critical (benchmarking, DX)
  • βœ… Team comfortable with bleeding-edge tech
  • βœ… Can absorb compatibility issues

Scenario: New startup project, using Bun runtime, need fastest DX, tolerance for early-adopter pain


🎬 Final Verdict

The Bottom Line

pnpm delivered the best balance:

  • βœ… 3x faster than npm (12s vs 45s cold, 2.1s vs 12s warm)
  • βœ… 53% disk savings (4.2GB vs 9GB across 5 projects)
  • βœ… Strict safety - caught 3 phantom dependency bugs
  • βœ… First-class workspaces - 12-line config for 10-package monorepo
  • βœ… Production stable - 7 years mature, used by Microsoft/Vite/Prisma
  • βœ… Zero migration risk - 100% npm compatible, easy rollback

ROI:

  • Time saved: 13 min/day = 5.4 hours/month = $432/month (at $80/hour)
  • Disk freed: 4.8GB = $6 value
  • Bugs prevented: 3 production issues = priceless

My Recommendation

Use pnpm if you:

  • Have monorepo with 2+ packages
  • Value speed + stability (not bleeding-edge)
  • Want disk space efficiency
  • Need strict dependency safety
  • Plan to grow team (future-proof)

Use Bun if you:

  • New greenfield project
  • Already using Bun runtime
  • Maximum speed > stability
  • Comfortable debugging compatibility issues

Use npm if you:

  • Simple single-package app
  • Maximum compatibility required
  • Zero setup time allowed
  • Quick prototype/demo

1 Month Later: Retrospective

What I got right:

  • pnpm's speed is real - 2.1s average install (cached)
  • Disk savings significant - freed 4.8GB across projects
  • Strict mode caught 3 bugs that would've hit production
  • Team onboarding was easy (15 minutes for new dev)

What surprised me:

  • Even faster than benchmarks in real-world use
  • Zero compatibility issues with modern tooling
  • CI/CD builds 3x faster with pnpm caching
  • Community support excellent despite smaller size

Would I choose it again?

Yes, without hesitation. For a monorepo with future team growth, pnpm hit the perfect balance of speed, safety, and stability. If I were building with Bun runtime (not just Node.js), I'd reconsider Bun's package manager, but for production Node.js apps, pnpm is the clear winner.


πŸ“š Resources

Official Documentation

Migration Guides

Comparison Articles

My Configuration


πŸ’¬ Your Turn

Which package manager are you using? Drop a comment:

  • Your project type (monorepo? single app? lib?)
  • Main pain point (speed? disk space? dependency issues?)
  • Which package manager you chose and why
  • Any migration challenges you faced?

I'll respond with personalized recommendations! πŸ‘‡


Next in series: "Why I Chose Biome Over ESLint+Prettier: 20x Faster Linting"

Previous: Why I Chose Turborepo Over Nx


Last updated: December 1, 2025

Tested with: pnpm 9.1.0, npm 10.9.4, Yarn 4.0, Bun 1.1

Questions? @saswatawork

Top comments (0)