HLD vs. LLD Design: Key Differences Explained

That’s the spark for our chat right now.
I’ve noticed plenty of people mixing these terms, or feeling unsure about when to zoom out and when to get granular.
I’ve been there myself.
Sometimes, I’d only worry about broad architecture, forgetting the nuts and bolts.
Other times, I’d get lost in the tiniest details and lose track of the big plan.

Let’s break it down.

---

Why Does This Topic Matter?

Every project starts with a plan.
Sometimes it’s a whiteboard sketch covering how different services connect.
Sometimes it’s a thorough breakdown of classes, memory usage, and data flows.
Both matter, but they do different jobs.
Skipping one can lead to confusion, cost overruns, or endless rewrites.
We need to get clear on the difference.

I remember working on an e-commerce platform where we had a neat, high-level overview for microservices.
We knew the general flow: the user makes an order, the order triggers an inventory check, that triggers a payment flow, and so on.
Everything looked great in the big picture.
But when we moved on to the actual implementation details, we realised our database schema wasn’t built for the shipping logic we wanted.
We had to backtrack and refine the data model.

---

High-Level System Design: What’s the Focus?

High-level design looks at the structure from 10,000 feet.
It covers how major parts fit together, how data moves around, and how we might scale in the future.
You might see diagrams showing services, message queues, load balancers, or external APIs.
It answers questions like:

• Which services do we need and how do they talk to each other?
• What’s the overall data flow?
• How do we handle big traffic spikes or failover?
• What’s the broad technology stack?

In other words, it’s more about the architecture than the specific lines of code.
It’s the blueprint that keeps everyone aligned.

Advantages of High-Level Design

• Clarity: Everyone on the team understands the major building blocks.
• Early Scalability Considerations: You can see if you need multiple servers, data replication, or cloud-based hosting.
• Faster Feedback: It’s easier to switch or add components when they’re still on a diagram, instead of buried in code.
• Simplifies Communication: Stakeholders, product managers, and non-technical folks often grasp big-picture diagrams.

Common Pitfalls

• Overlooking Implementation Nuances: If you only stay at the top level, you might not see hidden complexities.
• Excessive Abstraction: Sometimes diagrams become so abstract that no one knows how to code them.
• Ignoring Constraints: You might plan a robust architecture but forget bandwidth or hardware limitations.

---

Low-Level System Design: Why So Much Detail?

Low-level design zooms in.
This is the part where you decide how classes, data structures, and business logic all fit together.
You may define function signatures, database schemas, concurrency models, or memory layouts.
This is typically the next step after you have an overall architecture.

If you think of high-level design as an architect’s blueprint for a skyscraper, low-level design is the structural engineering plan that ensures each floor can handle the weight.
It clarifies exactly how things will be built.

Advantages of Low-Level Design

• Precise Implementation: You see how data flows at a granular level, preventing last-minute rewrites.
• Efficiency: You can spot performance bottlenecks and fix them before they become nightmares.
• Better Testing: Detailed designs make it easier to create unit tests and integration tests.
• Modular Code: You can structure classes and modules in a way that’s easier to maintain.

Common Pitfalls

• Overemphasis on Details: You can get stuck in analysis paralysis.
• Loss of Big Picture: It’s possible to forget how a module fits into the overall system.
• Scope Creep: People may keep adding features or micro-optimisations, ignoring the original purpose.

---

Balancing Both: How to Know When to Go High or Low

I’ve had managers who constantly wanted to see UML diagrams and memory allocations.
Others only cared about the top-level services.
The trick is balancing both.

A simple approach:

1. Start by outlining the high-level system design.
2. Identify critical parts that require deeper detail.
3. Draft a low-level plan for each core module or component.
4. Circle back to ensure your design decisions align with the overall architecture.

If you ignore high-level design, you risk building something that doesn’t scale or misses key features.
If you ignore low-level design, you may wind up with architecture that looks good on paper but fails in code.

---

Real-World Example

Picture a ride-sharing app.

• High-Level: You might define microservices for user profiles, rides, payments, and notifications.
  You show how each microservice communicates, and decide on a load balancer for user requests.
  You might factor in data replication to handle potential surges.

• Low-Level: You’d work out how the ride-matching service searches for drivers, how it updates statuses in the database, and how to handle concurrency (e.g., two drivers accepting the same ride).
  You’d define the exact data tables: Users, Drivers, Rides, etc.
  You’d decide if a function is asynchronous, or if you’ll queue events.

That’s the split.
One is broad strokes, the other is the step-by-step blueprint.

---

Where Coudo AI Comes In (A Glimpse)

Coudo AI focuses on machine coding challenges that often bridge high-level and low-level system design.
The approach is hands-on: you have a 1-2 hour window to code real-world features.
This feels more authentic than classic interview-style questions.

Here at Coudo AI, you find a range of problems like snake-and-ladders or expense-sharing-application-splitwise.
While these might sound like typical coding tests, they encourage you to map out design details too.
And if you’re feeling extra motivated, you can try Design Patterns problems for deeper clarity.

One of my favourite features is the AI-powered feedback.
It’s a neat concept.
Once you pass the initial test cases, the AI dives into the style and structure of your code.
It points out if your class design could be improved.
You also get the option for community-based PR reviews, which is like having expert peers on call.

---

FAQs

1. Do I always need a high-level diagram before coding?
I suggest starting with a rough architectural idea.
You don’t need a fully polished flowchart, but a quick overview can save you from major headaches.

2. Can I skip low-level design and code on the fly?
You can, but that’s risky.
When things grow, you might spend more time refactoring and fixing issues.
A short outline of classes, data flows, and function interactions helps keep you on track.

3. Which one is more important: high-level or low-level?
Both matter.
One shows the big picture, the other shows how to execute it.
They go hand in hand.

4. How does Coudo AI fit into my learning path?
It’s a place to test your knowledge in a practical setting.
You solve coding problems with real feedback, covering both architectural thinking and detailed implementation.

5. Is it better to aim for microservices or a monolith for high-level designs?
That depends on your user base, traffic projections, and team size.
A small team might do well with a monolith.
A bigger, scaling project may lean towards microservices.

---

Closing Thoughts

My best advice: don’t treat high-level and low-level system design like they’re in separate silos.
One guides the other.
Map out your architecture, then refine each critical piece with a well-structured low-level plan.
If you’re curious to get hands-on practice, try Coudo AI problems now. Coudo AI offer problems that push you to think big and then zoom in, which is a great way to sharpen both skills.

Remember, it’s easy to get lost in the big picture and forget the details, or vice versa.
But when you master both, you create applications that stand the test of time.
That’s the ultimate payoff for anyone serious about delivering great software.