A Dragonfly Research experiment comparing the performance of six blockchains by testing the capabilities of each automated market maker found that Solana’s OrcaDEX was clearly the winner in trading per second.
We managed 273.34 transactions per second and created a new block every 590 milliseconds.
Binance Smart Chain (BSC) traded 194.6 per second on PancakeSwap, followed by Polygon (MATIC), Avalanche (AVAX), Celo (CELO) and finally Ethereum (ETH), not too late.
A blog post by researcher “GM” had a rich ecosystem built on the Ethereum virtual machine (EVM) compatible chain, while the result was “If you really need high performance, go outside the EVM space. I need to see it. ” The line removed in the previous version of the post suggests that the user should eventually “give up EVM”.
Dragonfly Research is the research arm of Dragonfly Capital, and its portfolio page shows that it has invested in Celo, Avalanche, Cosmos, and Near as described in the report. We are not investing in Solana.
Over time, GM has concluded that other Layer 1 blockchains will outperform EVM compatible chains. He wrote:
“Overall, I come up with this impression. Ethereum is the smart contract operating system MS-DOS. But the current era of blockchain takes us to the era of Windows 95.”
EVMchain is a blockchain compatible with Ethereum Tools. In many cases, it helps the scalability of the Ethereum network.
The results of the experiment were published on March 2. This was an attempt to compare blockchain throughput by measuring the number of swaps that a native automated market maker (AMM) could create per block. AMM refers to decentralized exchanges (DEX) such as Uniswap and Pancake Swap that facilitate unstored token swaps on the chain.
The basic question GM tried to answer was, “How many transactions per second would be cleared if the entire block was filled with Uniswap V2 style transactions?”
Uniswap V2 was used as a benchmark because it has a 7-day transaction volume of $ 1.6 billion and is a major DEX. According to the report, the benchmark was 18.38 transactions per second and 13.2 seconds per new block. The author, GM, states that this is not a complete benchmark, but a “practice to get a complete picture of performance.”
The major DEX of each blockchain tested was spammed with the most fluid pair of token swaps to determine the current limit of capacity. We have not tested rollup scaling on layer 1 chains, as rollups can be used on all chains.
The five EVM chains in the experiment could be tested in the same way, but Solana needed another methodology that GM wrote in a subsequent blog post.
GM writes that none of the test blockchains are fully used and expects that “the performance of all major L1s will improve over time.”
The results of the report show Solana’s faster performance, but supporters of decentralization point to other issues with Solana. The EVM-compatible Fantom Opera’s Spookyswap DEX team criticized the findings and told Cointelegraph that Solana is “a completely centralized network, unlike Ethereum.”
Solana is also suffering from outages, raising concerns about network security and the reliability of applications in the ecosystem. Spookyswap team added
“Solana can be turned off and has a history of going down for days. You won’t know that with a proper EVM Layer 1 chain.”
GM urged readers to “do their own math” to confirm or refute the conclusions he reached. He also noted that blockchain optimization is so quick that introducing new optimizations on any chain can result in different results.
Related: StarkNet opens for DApp deployment on Ethereum mainnet
He also concludes that there is only a 25x performance difference between Ethereum and Solana, generally showing that “no one is getting that good performance” from linear token transactions on the chain. ..
