Are the “Ethereum Destroyers” As Fast As They Claim?

In recent years, Ethereum has dominated the space as the only de facto smart contract blockchain on the planet. People using blockchain or developing applications have no choice but to accept the technical characteristics and features of the Ethereum system. After all,  is a technical leap over Bitcoin and significantly faster, although it was and still is much more complex.

However, the performance is gradually not meeting the demand. As more users and applications come to ETH, the blockchain becomes congested due to lack of throughput.

Average TPS of 5 “Ethereum Destroyers” in 30 days

This, of course, is the main driver behind any “ETH destroyer”, competitive Layer 1 blockchains focused on better performance (both in terms of price and throughput) and even better Layer 1 protocols. The emphasis on Layer 1 is important as the movement of the Ethereum ecosystem is to develop Layer 2 blockchains that will significantly improve user experience performance.

This article analyzes 5 Ethereum destroyers – Avalanche, Binance Smart Chain BSC, Fantom, Polygon, Solana – and calculates the average transactions per second (TPS) over a 30-day period to compare them to Ethereum.

Calculations are performed based on data from the block explorer for each blockchain. To calculate the number of transactions per second, we divide the number of transactions per day by 86,400 (seconds per day).

#First. avalanche

quantity gtransaction daily on C chain avalanche | Source: snowtrace.io

Avalanche features technology built on top of the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM), which produced its first block on September 24, 2020. In mid-August, almost a year later, the system’s popularity exploded. According to the Avalanche project’s official website, the network can handle more than 4500 transactions per second. However, the calculation shows that the average number of transactions per second for the last 30 days is 8.21 TPS.

#2. BSC

number of daily transactions Binance Smart Chain | Source: snowtrace.io

The second killer in this analysis is Binance Smart Chain (BSC), which is also built on top of EVM Ethereum. Follow binance, the block time of BSC is around 3 seconds, which means that the blockchain can handle around 160 TPS. The actual average throughput over the last 30 days is pretty close to the official number as the average is 70 TPS.

#3. fantom

quantity gtransaction daily on Fantom | Source: snowtrace.io

According to the project’s website, Fantom is “an open-source, fast, high-throughput smart contract platform for digital assets and decentralized applications.” This blockchain is said to be able to reach 4000 TPS, but analysis shows that Fantom is distributing an average of 13 transactions per second over the past 30 days.

#4. olygon

quantity gtransaction daily on Chain PoS Polygon | Source: snowtrace.io

Fourth is Polygon, a sidechain with Ethereum. Calling Polygon an Ethereum destroyer would be an exaggeration given that the project is closely related to the leading smart contract blockchain. Polygon’s technology builds on EVM Ethereum and the platform is also evolving, acquiring Ethereum’s Layer 2 blockchains.

Polygon Network is said to be able to handle 6500 to 7200 TPS. The analysis shows that the actual average throughput over the last 30 days is 53 TPS.

Number of transactions on polygon

#5.Solana

quantity gDaily transaction on Ethereum | Source: snowtrace.io

Solana is probably the most powerful Ethereum destroyer among the above names. The network became particularly popular with NFT collectors. This blockchain has a throughput of up to 50,000 TPS. In the case of Solana, the data could not be downloaded for 30 days. Various Solana block explorers show live transaction statistics, cumulative transactions and current throughput. These stats show that the Solana system is processing around 1500 to 2500 TPS. While this is a very positive number, the goal of 50,000 TPS has not yet been reached.

So what about Ethereum? The leading smart contract platform is said to be able to process 14 transactions per second. In fact, it’s working at full speed all the time, and has been for a long time.

It can be argued that the “Ethereum destroyers” are not operating at their respective maximum capacity. But this will gradually less apply to Avalanche and BSC as these ecosystems become more popular with many applications and many users.

Throughput No can reflect user experience

It should also be noted that transaction throughput is not the same as transaction processing speed (TTF). TTF is much more important for user experience. For example, although Avalanche processes an average of 8.21 transactions per second and Ethereum processes 14 TPS, the TTF on Avalanche is less than 1 second, but Ethereum is over 20 seconds.

Are “Ethereum Destroyers” Faster than Ethereum? Yes, especially when it comes to user experience, not to mention network fees. But maybe we should stop focusing so much on promised performance metrics and start looking at actual performance and user experience.

Join CoinCu Telegram to keep track of news: https://t.me/coincunews

Follow CoinCu Youtube Channel | Follow CoinCu Facebook page