Pandas vs Polars: Which One Should You Use in 2025?

tags: python, data, pandas, tutorial

You’re probably still typing df.groupby() in Pandas while your Polars-using teammate has already finished their ETL pipeline and is on lunch. The gap isn’t just about speed—it’s about how these libraries think about data, memory, and the future of Python data engineering.

As we move through 2025, the choice between Pandas and Polars isn’t just a matter of preference; it’s a strategic decision that impacts how fast you can ship, how much RAM you burn, and whether your pipelines will survive when data scales from gigabytes to terabytes.

Why This Debate Matters Now

Pandas has been the backbone of Python data science for over a decade. It’s mature, ubiquitous, and integrates seamlessly with the entire ML ecosystem. But it’s also single-threaded, NumPy-based, and notoriously memory-heavy. Polars, born from Rust and powered by Apache Arrow, flips that model: it’s multi-threaded, columnar, and designed for lazy execution.

In 2025, data teams are no longer just analyzing small CSVs in Jupyter notebooks. They’re building production-grade pipelines, processing cloud-scale datasets, and demanding real-time insights. That’s where Polars shines—and where Pandas starts to groan.

Performance: The Raw Numbers Don’t Lie

Let’s cut through the marketing fluff. Independent benchmarks show Polars consistently outperforms Pandas across real-world tasks:

Data ingestion: Polars is ~2.5x faster for small datasets like Iris, but for larger transactional data, it’s 11x faster when reading Parquet files [1].
Filtering and grouping: Expect 2–3x speedups on filters and a 3x improvement on group-by operations [1].
CSV loading: Polars loads a 1GB CSV file 5x faster than Pandas, using only 179MB of RAM versus Pandas’s 1.4GB [4].
Overall speed: Polars executes common operations 10–100x faster than Pandas, especially on joins, filters, and aggregations [2].

The magic? Polars uses parallelism (all CPU cores via Rust’s concurrency model) and lazy execution (query optimization before execution), while Pandas evaluates everything eagerly and runs single-threaded [2][3].

Memory Efficiency: Stop Burning RAM

Pandas is notorious for requiring 5–10x the dataset size in RAM to perform operations. Polars, thanks to its Arrow-style columnar storage, needs only 2–4x [2]. That’s not a typo—it’s a revolution for teams working with large datasets or running on limited cloud instances.

If you’ve ever hit an OutOfMemoryError in Pandas while trying to join two 10GB tables, Polars will feel like a breath of fresh air. It can handle larger-than-memory workloads gracefully using its lazy mode [3].

When to Use Pandas (Yes, It Still Has a Place)

Don’t throw Pandas out yet. It’s still the right tool for:

Interactive exploratory data analysis (EDA): Pandas’ syntax is more compact for quick one-off tasks, and its ecosystem support is unmatched [3][7].
Custom Python logic: If your workflow involves heavy custom Python functions or non-native operations, Pandas is often more convenient [3].
Legacy pipelines: If your team’s entire ML stack is built around Pandas, switching may introduce friction.
Small-to-medium datasets: For datasets under a few hundred MBs, Pandas is still convenient and widely supported [4].

Pandas also integrates more broadly with plotting frameworks (Matplotlib, Seaborn), ML libraries (Scikit-learn, XGBoost), and scientific tools [2].

When to Switch to Polars (Your 2025 Action Plan)

Here’s your practical checklist for switching to Polars TODAY:

✅ Use Polars When:

Your dataset fits in memory but you need speed for filters, joins, or group-bys [1][5].
You’re building production ETL pipelines or processing large Parquet/CSV files [3][4].
You want lower RAM usage and multi-threaded performance [2].
Your team is ready to adopt method chaining and expression-based syntax [7].

🚀 Quick Start: Convert Your First Pandas Script to Polars

Here’s a working example that shows how to load data, filter, group, and aggregate in both libraries:

import pandas as pd
import polars as pl
import time

# Load data
csv_path = "transactions.csv"  # Replace with your file

# Pandas version
start = time.time()
df_pd = pd.read_csv(csv_path)
result_pd = df_pd.groupby("category")["amount"].sum().reset_index()
print(f"Pandas: {time.time() - start:.2f}s")

# Polars version
start = time.time()
df_pl = pl.read_csv(csv_path)
result_pl = df_pl.group_by("category").agg(pl.col("amount").sum())
print(f"Polars: {time.time() - start:.2f}s")

On a 1GB CSV, Polars will typically finish 5x faster with 8x less memory [4]. The syntax is slightly more explicit (e.g., pl.col("amount") instead of df["amount"]), but it encourages clear, chainable expressions [7].

🔁 Lazy Execution: The Polars Superpower

For large datasets, enable lazy mode to optimize your query before execution:

df_pl = pl.scan_csv("transactions.csv")  # Lazy scan
result = df_pl.filter(pl.col("amount") > 100)
             .group_by("category")
             .agg(pl.col("amount").sum())
             .collect()  # Execute

This lets Polars reorder operations, skip unnecessary reads, and reduce memory usage [3].

Syntax Differences: Pandas vs. Polars

Task	Pandas Syntax	Polars Syntax
Filter	`df[df["col"] > 5]`	`df.filter(pl.col("col") > 5)`
Group & Sum	`df.groupby("col")["val"].sum()`	`df.group_by("col").agg(pl.col("val").sum())`
Select Column	`df["col"]`	`df["col"]` or `df.select("col")`
Lazy Load	❌ Not supported	`pl.scan_csv("file.csv")`

Polars’ syntax is more explicit but encourages method chaining and expression-based logic, which can make complex pipelines more readable [7].

The Ecosystem Reality Check

Polars is growing fast, but Pandas still wins on interoperability. If your workflow relies on:

Scikit-learn, TensorFlow, or PyTorch
Seaborn, Matplotlib, or Plotly
Legacy Pandas-only libraries

You might need to convert between libraries using pl.from_pandas() or df.to_pandas() [2][7].

But for data engineering, cloud-scale pipelines, and performance-critical tasks, Polars is the future [3][4].

Your 2025 Decision Framework

Ask yourself these three questions:

Is speed or memory a bottleneck? → Switch to Polars.
Are you doing interactive EDA with custom Python logic? → Stick with Pandas.
Is your pipeline production-grade and scaling? → Use Polars (or both).

There’s no blanket answer. Many teams end up using both: Pandas for exploration, Polars for production [3].

Start Today: One Small Step

Don’t wait for a full migration. Pick one script in your pipeline that’s slow or memory-heavy. Rewrite it in Polars. Benchmark it. If it’s faster and uses less RAM (which it almost will be), you’ve got your answer.

The data world is moving fast. In 2025, the teams that ship fastest aren’t just writing code—they’re choosing the right tools. Polars isn’t just a faster Pandas; it’s a new paradigm for Python data engineering.

What’s your first Polars script going to be? Drop it in the comments, share your benchmarks, and let’s push the data community forward together. 🚀

If you found this helpful, consider buying me a coffee ☕ — it keeps these articles coming!

Also check out my AI tools collection: AI 次元世界 — free AI tools for developers.