Solana vs Ethereum: An In-Depth Comparison

Key Takeaways:

• Ethereum uses Proof of Stake (PoS) to enhance security, reduce energy consumption, and better implement new scaling solutions; Solana, meanwhile, employs a hybrid of PoS and Proof of History (PoH) for high transaction speeds.

• Solana processes around 3,000 transactions per second (tps) in the real world, significantly outpacing Ethereum’s 15–30 tps, making it more scalable but with potential centralisation concerns.

• Ethereum’s gas fees fluctuate with network demand, from less than a dollar to double digits; whereas, Solana maintains consistently low fees (around $0.00025 per transaction).

• Ethereum leads in the decentralised finance (DeFi) sector with a mature ecosystem and has dominated total value locked (TVL), though Solana’s DeFi landscape is rapidly growing.

• Both Ethereum and Solana have deflationary mechanisms, with Ethereum burning base fees and Solana burning 50% of transaction fees.

• Ethereum enjoys widespread adoption and strong institutional interest, with a market cap over $300 billion, while Solana is gaining momentum, particularly in DeFi and meme coins.

• Ethereum’s transition to PoS and ongoing upgrades aim to address scalability issues, which are the same challenges for Solana’s development.

Comparison of Ethereum and Solana’s Consensus Mechanisms

Ethereum: Proof of Stake (PoS)

Ethereum, originally built on Proof of Work (PoW), transitioned to Proof of Stake (PoS) with its Ethereum 2.0 upgrade, aiming to enhance scalability and security, and reduce energy consumption. In PoS, participants, known as validators, lock up their cryptocurrency to validate transactions and create new blocks. Ethereum’s PoS system requires a minimum of 32 ETH to become a validator. This consensus mechanism has several advantages over the traditional PoW consensus:

1. Better energy efficiency.
2. Reduced hardware requirements.
3. Reduced centralisation risk.
4. Enhanced security through economic incentives.

Solana: Proof of History (PoH)

Solana takes it even one step further with a unique consensus mechanism called Proof of History (PoH), which works in conjunction with PoS by incorporating the concept of time into the blockchain, using a Verifiable Delay Function (VDF) to generate timestamps for each transaction.

Key features of Solana’s PoH:

• Verifies the time elapsed between events without needing to communicate extensively.

• The mechanism utilises a sequential preimage-resistant hash function to create a chain of hashes, where each hash depends on the previous one. This chaining process ensures that tampering with one hash would require recalculating all subsequent hashes, thereby enhancing security and integrity.

• PoH employs VDFs, which are computationally intensive to compute but easy to verify. This characteristic allows Solana to generate timestamps that are difficult for attackers to manipulate, ensuring the authenticity of the transaction history.

• PoH eliminates the need for a trusted time source, as the timestamps generated can be independently verified by anyone in the network.

• PoS combined with PoH enables Solana’s high transaction throughput.

• The use of PoH minimises the time required for transaction confirmations, enabling faster finality.

• By creating a cryptographically secure sequence of events, PoH helps prevent issues like replay attacks and ensures the integrity of the transaction history.

PoH allows Solana to process transactions much faster than traditional consensus mechanisms by avoiding the need for every node to agree on each transaction’s order, resulting in significantly faster processing times.

While both consensus mechanisms offer improvements over traditional PoW systems, they each have their strengths and challenges. 

Ethereum’s PoS provides a balance between decentralisation and scalability, while Solana’s PoH offers relatively higher scalability. However, the Solana network still faces scalability  issues, as evidenced by network outages and congestion. 

Solana vs Ethereum Scalability

Commonly discussed in decentralised networks like blockchains, scalability refers to the ability of a blockchain network to handle an increasing number of transactions and maintain high performance as the load increases. Throughput, finality, and confirmation time are the three main factors for a blockchain’s scalability.

Throughput: How many transactions can be handled per second.

Finality: The irreversibility once a transaction has been confirmed and added to a block in a blockchain network.

Confirmation Time: The time it takes for a transaction to be included in a block and added to the blockchain.

Confirmation time is about how quickly a transaction is added to a block, while finality is about how secure and irreversible that transaction becomes.

Ethereum Scalability

Ethereum, while pioneering in the blockchain space, has faced challenges with scalability. The network currently processes around 15–30 transactions per second (tps), which can lead to congestion during high-demand periods. This limitation has resulted in slower confirmation times and increased gas fees, sometimes ranging from less than $1 to $50 or more.

To address these issues, Ethereum transitioned from its original Proof of Work (PoW) to a Proof of Stake (PoS) model in an update called ‘The Merge’. These upgrades both enhanced scalability and reduced energy consumption. Additionally, Ethereum is adopting Layer-2 scaling solutions to improve scalability.

Solana’s High-Speed Transactions

Solana has gained attention for its impressive transaction speed and scalability with its unique PoH consensus mechanism in conjunction with PoS, allowing it to process transactions much faster than traditional consensus mechanisms.

Solana’s architecture enables it to handle thousands of transactions per second, with theoretical capabilities of up to 65,000 tps. The actual observed speed is around 3,000 tps, which is still significantly higher than Ethereum’s current capacity. The high throughput is achieved through the combination of PoH and PoS.

Transactions timestamped with PoH are processed using a PoS-based consensus algorithm (Tower BFT). Validators stake Solana’s native token SOL to participate, earning rewards for securing the network and validating transactions. Tower BFT, with the help of PoH’s timekeeping, quickly achieves consensus, reducing communications amongst nodes and increasing overall efficiency.

While Solana offers superior speed and lower transaction costs, it’s important to note that the network has experienced performance issues and outages as it scales. Ethereum, despite its limitations, has a larger ecosystem and more total value locked (TVL) in its blockchain.

Both networks are actively working on improvements. Ethereum’s transition to PoS and the implementation of sharding have significantly boosted its performance. Meanwhile, Solana is working on Firedancer, a new validator client, which could potentially process up to 1 million tps, further enhancing Solana’s already impressive speed. Firedancer built its first block on a testnet in July 2024.

Transaction Costs and Gas Fees

Ethereum’s Transaction Fee Structure

For Ethereum, fees are calculated in the following way:

gas fee = base fee + priority fee; while transaction fee = gas price x gas used

Ethereum’s gas fee structure has been a point of contention for users and developers alike. These fees, required to process transactions and execute smart contracts, can significantly fluctuate based on network demand. During periods of high congestion, gas fees and gas prices can skyrocket, making it costly for users to interact with decentralised applications (dapps) or perform simple transactions.

The unpredictability of Ethereum’s gas fees has raised concerns within its ecosystem. As of August 2024, the average gas price ranged from 2 to 99 Gwei (1 Gwei = 10^-9 ETH), which has led to the fluctuation of the average transaction fee from ~$1 to $30. This volatility has a substantial impact on the user experience, especially for smaller transactions where the fee might outweigh the transaction value itself.

Solana’s Low-Cost Transactions

In contrast, Solana offers a more cost-effective environment for users and developers with its PoS-PoH mechanism that allows for significantly lower transaction costs. On average, a Solana transaction costs about 0.0001 SOL, which translates to approximately $0.00025.

Solana’s low fees result from its higher scalability, processing thousands of transactions per second. This efficiency creates a more attractive platform for developers and users, particularly for those dealing with microtransactions or frequent interactions.

As both networks continue to evolve, addressing transaction costs remains a key focus. Ethereum is actively working on scaling solutions to reduce fees, while Solana aims to maintain its low-cost advantage while improving network stability.

Ethereum vs Solana’s DeFi and NFT Capabilities

Ethereum’s DeFi Dominance

Ethereum has established itself as the leader in the decentralised finance (DeFi) sector. Launched in 2015, Ethereum introduced smart contracts, enabling for the development of dapps. Its ecosystem boasts over 4,700 dapps and 584,000 unique active wallets (UAWs), dominating with over 50% share of the TVL, making it the largest and most diverse platform in the space.

Major DeFi protocols like Uniswap, MakerDAO, and Compound have transformed borrowing, lending, and trading in the crypto world. Ethereum’s security, maturity, and vibrant ecosystem have made it the preferred choice for developers, contributing to its dominance in the DeFi landscape.

Solana’s Emerging DeFi Scene

Despite being a relative newcomer, Solana has rapidly developed a robust DeFi ecosystem. With over 350 dapps and 1.28 million UAWs, it focuses on high throughput and low transaction costs.

Its unique consensus mechanism’s efficiency has attracted projects like Jupiter, Raydium, and Orca, which leverage Solana’s speed to offer a smoother user experience. Solana’s growth in the DeFi space has been noticeable, with its user base expanding at a much faster pace since early 2022.

Solana and Ethereum NFT Marketplaces Comparison

Both Ethereum and Solana have made significant strides in the non-fungible token (NFT) space, each offering unique advantages:

While Ethereum dominates the NFT market with platforms like OpenSea leading the charge, Solana is gaining traction as a cost-effective alternative. Solana’s low fees and fast transaction speeds make it attractive for projects and collectors looking to avoid Ethereum’s high gas fees, especially for high-frequency transactions and micro-NFTs.

Tokenomics: ETH vs SOL

Ethereum’s Tokenomics

Ethereum’s tokenomics underwent a significant change with the implementation of EIP-1559, which adopted an updated fee structure for transactions on Ethereum:

Transaction fee = base fee + priority fee 

This update introduced a base fee for transactions, which is burned, potentially making ETH deflationary in the long run. As network activity increases, more ETH is burned, potentially leading to price appreciation.

Solana’s Token Model

Solana adopts a similar fee structure to Ethereum that contains a base fee and priority fee. 

SOL facilitates fast and low-cost transactions, typically costing a fraction of a cent. Solana’s tokenomics prioritise scalability and efficiency, with 50% of transaction fees burned as part of its economic design.

Comparison of Tokenomic Models

Market Adoption and Institutional Interest

Ethereum: Widespread Adoption

Ethereum has established itself as a leader in the blockchain space, boasting a mature and expansive ecosystem. With over 4,700 dapps operating on its network, Ethereum has become the go-to platform for developers and users alike, and taken a pioneering role in the DeFi sector, hosting influential projects like Uniswap, MakerDAO, and Aave. Ethereum’s TVL in DeFi projects has reached an impressive $45.845 billion at the time of writing, showcasing its significant market share.

The platform’s dominance extends to the NFT sector, with popular and expensive collections built on the network, like CryptoPunks, Bored Ape Yacht Club, and Pudgy Penguins. This widespread adoption has contributed to Ethereum’s market cap nearing $300 billion, solidifying its position as the second-most valuable cryptocurrency after Bitcoin.

In addition, the US approved Ethereum spot exchange-traded funds (ETFs) in July 2024, leading to further institutional adoption and inflow of funds from the traditional finance (TradFi) market.

Solana: Growing Popularity

While newer to the scene, Solana has rapidly gained traction in the blockchain space with its appealing high-speed, low-cost transactions, making it particularly attractive for gaming, DeFi, and NFT projects. Solana’s ecosystem, though smaller than Ethereum’s, has shown remarkable growth and potential.

The platform’s DeFi landscape is also expanding, with platforms like Serum and Raydium gaining popularity. Solana’s TVL stands at $4.911 billion at the time of writing, reflecting its growing presence in the market.

Solana has been gaining attention from major institutional and financial players, including a collaboration with payment giant Visa, enabling cardholders to settle transactions using Solana-based stablecoins. This marks a significant milestone in its institutional adoption. Additionally, although not yet approved in the US, Brazil approved two Solana ETFs in August 2024. 

Market Comparison

Conclusion

The comparison between Ethereum and Solana reveals two powerhouse blockchains, each with its own strengths and challenges. Ethereum’s established ecosystem and ongoing upgrades have a significant influence on the DeFi and NFT landscapes, while Solana’s high-speed, low-cost transactions are causing a revolution in blockchain scalability. Both platforms continue to evolve, addressing their respective limitations to meet the growing demands of users and developers alike.

As the blockchain space keeps expanding, the competition between Ethereum and Solana is likely to drive innovation and improve user experiences across the board. While Ethereum’s widespread adoption and institutional interest give it an edge, Solana’s rapid growth and technological advancements make it a strong contender. In the end, the success of these platforms will depend on their ability to adapt to changing market needs and deliver value to their users and developers.

Due Diligence and Do Your Own Research

All examples listed in this article are for informational purposes only. You should not construe any such information or other material as legal, tax, investment, financial, cybersecurity, or other advice. Nothing contained herein shall constitute a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer by Crypto.com to invest, buy, or sell any coins, tokens, or other crypto assets. Returns on the buying and selling of crypto assets may be subject to tax, including capital gains tax, in your jurisdiction. Any descriptions of Crypto.com products or features are merely for illustrative purposes and do not constitute an endorsement, invitation, or solicitation.

Past performance is not a guarantee or predictor of future performance. The value of crypto assets can increase or decrease, and you could lose all or a substantial amount of your purchase price. When assessing a crypto asset, it’s essential for you to do your research and due diligence to make the best possible judgement, as any purchases shall be your sole responsibility.