langchain vs langgraph

The landscape of AI development frameworks has evolved rapidly, and two names consistently appear in conversations about building production-ready LLM applications: LangChain and LangGraph. While both originate from the same development team and share the goal of simplifying AI application development, they serve fundamentally different architectural approaches and use cases. Understanding when to use each framework—and whether to combine them—has become essential knowledge for developers building AI-powered solutions.

Understanding LangChain: The Foundation of LLM Application Development

LangChain emerged in late 2022 as one of the first comprehensive frameworks designed specifically for building applications with large language models. Created by Harrison Chase and initially released as an open-source project, LangChain quickly became a popular tool for developers seeking to move beyond simple API calls and create more sophisticated AI-powered applications.

The framework introduces several key abstractions that have become industry standards. At its core, LangChain provides chains—sequences of operations that connect prompts, language models, and data sources. These chains enable developers to create structured workflows where output from one component becomes input for the next. A typical chain might retrieve relevant documents from a database, format them into a prompt, send that prompt to an LLM, and then parse the response into a structured format.

LangChain also offers robust support for agents, which are AI systems capable of deciding which tools to use based on user input. Rather than following a predetermined sequence, agents can dynamically select from a variety of capabilities—searching the web, running code, querying databases, or calling APIs—to accomplish complex tasks.

The framework includes extensive integrations with popular LLM providers (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Mistral, and dozens of others), vector databases (Pinecone, Chroma, Weaviate, FAISS), and external tools. This ecosystem approach means developers can swap out components without rewriting their entire application logic.

Memory capabilities represent another LangChain strength. The framework provides various memory types—conversation buffer memory, summary memory, and entity memory—that allow applications to maintain context across multiple interactions. This proves invaluable for building chatbots and conversational AI systems that need to remember previous exchanges.

Understanding LangGraph: Graph-Based AI Orchestration

LangGraph represents the next evolution in the LangChain ecosystem, emerging in early 2024 as a specialized tool for building complex, multi-agent applications with sophisticated control flow. While LangChain excels at linear workflows, LangGraph introduces a graph-based architecture that enables cyclic workflows, conditional branching, and complex state management.

The fundamental difference lies in how these frameworks conceptualize application flow. Where LangChain thinks in terms of linear sequences, LangGraph models applications as directed graphs where nodes represent computational steps and edges represent the flow of data and control between those steps. This architecture allows for cycles—something impossible in traditional LangChain chains—making it possible to build applications that iterate, reflect, and refine their outputs.

State management in LangGraph is particularly noteworthy. The framework introduces a state passing mechanism where each node in the graph can read from and write to a shared state object. This enables coordination between multiple agents or components, allowing them to collaborate on complex tasks while maintaining awareness of what other components have accomplished.

Human-in-the-loop workflows become significantly easier to implement with LangGraph. Applications can pause execution at critical decision points, present information to users, and resume processing based on human input. This capability is essential for enterprise applications requiring oversight, approval workflows, or interactive debugging.

The framework also excels at building production-grade agentic systems. While LangChain agents can handle single-tool selection, LangGraph enables orchestrating multiple specialized agents that work together. A typical use case might involve one agent handling research, another responsible for code generation, and a third managing validation—each operating as a distinct node within a larger graph.

Key Differences: When to Choose Each Framework

Choosing between LangChain and LangGraph requires understanding your application’s complexity and requirements.

Workflow Complexity: For straightforward, linear workflows—such as document summarization, basic question answering, or simple chatbot interactions—LangChain’s sequential chains provide a simpler, more direct implementation. The learning curve is gentler, and the code tends to be more readable for developers new to AI application development.

For complex workflows involving multiple decision points, conditional logic, or iterative refinement, LangGraph’s graph model offers advantages. If your application needs to try multiple approaches when one fails, maintain complex state across many steps, or coordinate multiple specialized components, LangGraph becomes the clearer choice.

State Requirements: LangChain’s memory system works well for conversational applications requiring simple context retention. When you need sophisticated state management—tracking intermediate results across dozens of steps, coordinating multiple concurrent processes, or implementing complex undo/redo functionality—LangGraph provides abstractions suited to this.

Production Readiness: Both frameworks have proven themselves in production environments, but they excel in different contexts. LangChain benefits from a more mature ecosystem with extensive documentation, community examples, and third-party integrations accumulated over more than a year of widespread adoption. LangGraph, while newer, has rapidly gained traction for enterprise applications requiring robust orchestration.

Team Experience: Organizations already invested in LangChain often find that most requirements can be met with their existing codebase. Adding LangGraph for specific complex components while maintaining LangChain for simpler features represents a practical hybrid approach that many teams adopt.

The Integration Possibilities

Rather than viewing these frameworks as mutually exclusive, many developers discover that combining both provides the best of both worlds. LangChain’s components can function as nodes within a LangGraph, meaning existing LangChain implementations can be incorporated into more complex graph-based workflows.

This interoperability proves valuable for gradual migrations. A team might begin with pure LangChain, then introduce LangGraph nodes for specific complex components while maintaining the overall application structure. Over time, as requirements grow more sophisticated, the balance shifts toward more comprehensive LangGraph usage.

The LangChain team has emphasized that both tools share underlying design philosophies and often work better together than against each other. The decision between them should be guided by specific project requirements rather than philosophical preferences.

Looking Forward: The Future of AI Development Frameworks

The rapid evolution from LangChain to LangGraph reflects broader trends in AI application development. As language models become more capable and agents more sophisticated, the frameworks supporting their use must evolve correspondingly. The industry appears to be moving toward graph-based architectures that can handle increasing complexity, multiple specialized models, and sophisticated orchestration requirements.

Both frameworks continue active development, with the LangChain team regularly releasing improvements to both. For developers entering this space, understanding both tools provides flexibility to match architecture to requirements.

The choice between LangChain and LangGraph ultimately comes down to understanding your specific needs: simpler applications benefit from LangChain’s straightforward approach, while complex multi-agent systems find their home in LangGraph’s graph-based orchestration. In many cases, the most pragmatic path involves understanding both, allowing developers to select the right tool for each challenge they encounter.