The experience of Dragonfly Research, which compared the performance of six blockchains by testing the characteristics of automated market makers (AMMs) on each of them, showed that the decentralized exchange Solana Orca (DEX) was the clear winner in terms of the number of transactions per blockchain. Secondly.
It ran 273.34 transactions per second and created a new block every 590 milliseconds.
BNB Smart Chain is not behind with 194.6 transactions per second on PancakeSwap, followed by Polygon, Avalanche, Celo (CELO) and finally Ethereum.
A blog post by researcher “GM” claims that while it is a rich ecosystem built on threads compatible with the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) the results show that “if you want really high performance, you have to look beyond the EVM space. The line Deleted in an earlier version of the post users eventually had to “give up the EVM”.
Dragonfly Research is the research arm of Dragonfly Capital, and its portfolio page states that it has invested in Celo, Avalanche, Cosmos, and Near, mentioned in the report. He did not invest in Solana.
GM concluded that over time, other EVM-compliant blockchains will outperform other Tier 1 blockchains. he wrote:
“In general, I had the following impression: Ethereum is MS-DOS among the operating systems with smart contracts. But the current era of blockchain takes us to the era of Windows 95.”
EVM Chains are blockchains compatible with Ethereum instruments. They often help with the scalability of the Ethereum network.
The results of the trial were published on March 2. This was an attempt to compare the throughput of the blockchain by measuring the number of swaps that could be made per block on automated market makers. AMMs are decentralized exchanges like Uniswap and PancakeSwap that allow on-chain token exchange that does not involve custody.
The main question that GM tried to answer was: “If you fill the entire block with Uniswap v2 deals, how many trades will be executed per second?”
Uniswap v2 was used as the benchmark as it is the dominant DEX with a 7-day transaction volume of $1.6 billion. The benchmark index reached 18.38 transactions per second, at 13.2 seconds for each new block, according to the report. GM also noted that while it’s not a perfect metric, it “indicates an overall view of performance.”
Leading DEXs in each tested block chain were randomized using token swaps on the most float pairs to determine the current flow rate. They did not test the torsion scale on Level 1 chains because the torsions can be used on all chains.
While the five EVM chains in the experiment could have been tested in the same way, Solana needed a different methodology, something the GM wrote about in the next blog post.
AMM Benchmark for Evaluating Blockchain Performance
The GM wrote that none of the tested blockchains have been used to their full potential, and they expect that “the performance of all major L1s will improve over time.”
Although the report’s results showed a higher performance for Solana, proponents of decentralization point to other problems with Solana. The EVM-compatible Spookyswap DEX team at Fantom Opera criticized the findings and told Cointelegraph that Solana is a “completely centralized network, unlike Ethereum.”
Solana is also experiencing outages, which raises concerns about network security and the reliability of applications in the ecosystem. The Spookyswap team added:
“Solana can be shut down and shut down in a few days. You won’t see this with proper EVM Level 1 chains.”
GM urged readers to “make the calculations themselves” to confirm or refute its conclusions. He also noted that blockchain improvements happen very quickly, so when a new improvement is introduced in any chain, the results may vary.
Related: StarkNet Now Open for DApp Distribution on the Ethereum Network
He also concluded that the maximum performance difference between Ethereum and Solana is only 25 times, which indicates that in general, “nobody gets such high performance” from linear token transactions on the network.
