Since the coming to the fore of Bitcoin, the blockchain domain has mushroomed into a string of industry verticals from crypto to Metaverse to Web3 and a host of industry horizontals including DeFi, GameFi and SocialFi. Notwithstanding the current dip in the crypto market, the continous growth of blockchain as the underlying technology remains unabated with the market size of the blockchain industry projected to be recording a compound annual growthrate (CAGR) of 68% over the next six years to reach USD173.68 billion by 2028.
In tandem with the rising market size of the blockchain industry, a growing number of Layer-1 (L1) blockchains has come to the fore to meet the increasing demands of the market leading to what is colloquially known as the “L1 Blockchains War”. In this article, we are going to take a deep dive into three L1 blockchains which have been making quite a lot of noises of late namely Aptos, SUI and Shardeum before exploring what it means for users.
What It Means for Users
At this juncture Aptos has the most number of projects under its ecosystem with more than 150 whereas SUI has about 60 plus. As for Shardeum, the number of projects under its ecosystem is unavailable as it is currently in the Alphanet phase. Nonetheless, the upcoming launch of its Mainnet which is slated for the secondquarter of 2023 (Q2 2023) is set to bring about a rapid rise in the number of projects under the network’s ecosystem thanks to its EVM-compatibility. From a user benefit perspective, the theory of network effects posits that “increasednumbersofpeopleorparticipants improve the value of a good or service.”
Given the fact that the Aptos blockchain currently has the most number of projects under its ecosystem, users of the projects of Aptos’ ecosystem would gain the most from network effects followed by users of the projects of SUI’s ecosystem. However it is the users of the projects of Shardeum’s ecosystem which could stand to gain the most from such effects once the network launches its Mainnet in Q2 2023 thanks to Shardeum’s EVM-compatibility.
In general, the greater the size of an ecosystem the wider the scope of available services would be thereby facilitating greater intra-chain interoperability. This dispenses with the need to resort to the use of cross-chain functionalities thereby resulting in a smoother and more convenient user experience (UX).
According to State of the Dapps, as of May 2022 there are a total of more than 4,000+ operating dApps of which 2,900+ operate using Ethereum’s network. The fact that Shardeum uses EVM-based programming languages namely Solidity and Vyper renders the blockchain to be EVM-compatible. This means that users of the projects of Shardeum’s ecosystem would have access to Ethereum’s network though the same cannot be said of Aptos and SUI both of which are non-EVM compatible.
A notable use case example is that of MetaMask which requires EVM-compatibility. Nonetheless in June 2022, NEAR protocol became the first non-EVM compatible chain to be integrated with MetaMask thereby paving the way for other non-EVM compatible chains such as Aptos and SUI to be integrated with MetaMask as well in the future.
EVM-compatibility provides users of a blockchain with access to the rich and diverse ecosystem of Ethereum-based dApps whereby this would pave the way to a more engaging and rewarding UX.
Between Aptos and SUI, the latter blockchain is the one which is relatively more democratic. This is thanks to its lower hardware requirements, across all three parameters of CPU cores as well as RAM and storage size, for nodes to participate in its network. SUI’s lower hardware requirements for nodes to participate in its network means that the barriers to entry for participating nodes are lower which in turn renders it to be more democratic vis-a-vis Aptos.
As for Shardeum, the only parameter for which data is available is that of RAM size whereby its node hardware requirement of 4GB is much lower than both that of Aptos’ (32GB), and only half that of SUI’s (8GB). In many ways, Shardeum’s low threshold for its node hardware requirement is very much in line with its mission of promoting decentralization for everyone though it remains to be seen as to whether this low threshold can be maintained for the remaining two parameters of CPU cores and storage size.
Lower hardware requirements for participating nodes equate to lower barriers to entry to a blockchain network resulting in the participants of the network having a greater polarity scale. This in turn widens the distribution reach of the network thereby bringing to life the decentralization ideals of blockchain.
In line with the general direction in the crypto market of shifting towards the use of the more energy efficient PoS consensus mechanism as illustrated by Ethereum’s the Merge. In this regard, all three blockchains of Aptos, SUI and Shardeum operate using PoS, albeit with different configurations to mitigate the security risks associated with the use of PoS particularly those in relation to a 51% attack.
Aptos opted for a BFT-style PoS consensus mechanism where security is achieved through the random assignment to validators of the right to propose blocks whereby voting is done through a multi-round process. SUI on the other hand went for delegated PoS which entails a voting process whereby the tokens of voters are deposited into a staking pool linked to a particular delegate. As for Shardeum, it addresses the security risks of PoS using a novel mechanism in the form of PoQ which requires the generation of a receipt which verifies that the majority of voters in the consensus group had voted for the transaction in order for the PoS voting results to be valid.
If track records are anything to go by, blockchain networks are far from being foolproof when it comes to security. This is why the use of different configurations to mitigate the risks associated with the use of PoS mechanisms is a key factor when it comes to enhancing the security of a blockchain network.
Of the three blockchains, Aptos leads the way in terms of capacity as its blockchain has the highest throughput limits (up to 160k TPS) followed by SUI (up to 120k TPS) and Shardeum (up to 100k TPS). Nonetheless, SUI claims that its blockchain is designed in such a manner as to allow SUI validators (nodes) to “effectively scale the network throughput infinitely to meet the demand of builders and creators” which means that the network’s TPS could potentially be unlimited. As for latency, Shardeum tops the chart with its purported immediate transaction finality with Aptos coming in second at less than one second and SUI requiring between two to three seconds.
Nonetheless, thanks to its architectural design which accommodated its USP of facilitating parallel execution through the combined use of causal order and total order, SUI blockchain allows for causally independent transactions to reach parallelized agreement via Byzantine Consistent Broadcast. By forgoing the need for a full consensus, SUI blockchain can be scaled with no bounds thereby paving the way for extremely low latency. This in turn renders its network to be particularly suited for use cases that require high transaction efficiencies such as. gaming or retail payments. When it comes to throughput limits, Aptos is undoubtedly the leader of the pack though SUI’s potential for unlimited scalability could be a game-changer moving forward.
In the fast-paced crypto world, speed is of the essence. That’s why blockchain networks which are able to offer high TPS are the way to go because sometimes a fraction of a second can make a big difference when the stakes are high.
The decentralized feature of blockchain means that the nodes on a network are required to store the blocks of data for the transactions carried out on the network. As the volume of transactions carried out on the network builds up and the amount of data blocks stored on the nodes increase correspondingly, this could lead to the state bloat problem the addressing of which would require the use of sharding mechanisms if the blockchain is to maintain its network capacity which is critical for its optimal functioning. In order to address the state bloat problem, Aptos uses homogeneous state sharding which allows for horizontal throughput scalability whereby developers can benefit from cross-shards compatibility by working in a single universal state thereby enabling wallets to easily incorporate sharded data for their users.
In contrast, SUI’s architectural framework which consists of independent validators facilitates the use of intra-validator sharding that allows for atomic composability even after the commissioning of state updates. As for Shardeum, it uses a mechanism which combines the approaches of auto-scaling and dynamic sharding through which nodes will be immediately added to the network when transaction volume increases whereby this is facilitated by the dynamic nature of the nodes which are equipped with cross-shards composability thereby enabling these nodes to move around and accommodate more data based on the prevalent traffic needs of the network.
When it comes to network efficiency, it is essentially a long game. As the usage of a blockchain network increases and the amount of stored data accumulates over time, network efficiency would be a key factor in determining the viability of a network. Hence, users should adopt a long term perspective when considering the aspect of network efficiency for the blockchain of their choice.
The pricing of gas fees is a key factor which determines the user growth rate of a blockchain as it affects the economic viability of transactions executed over the network. In terms of its gas fee pricing mechanism, Aptos uses a flexible two-tier approach whereby the minimum gas fee would be set by Aptos governance whereas the actual gas fee would be determined by the market. Nonetheless, users have the option of paying higher than the market-determined gas fee if they want to bump up their transaction to a higher priority level.
SUI on the other hand focuses on the execution side of transactions by allowing validators throughout the network to agree on the reference prices at the start of each Sui epoch which covers a period of about 24 hours. These reference prices would serve as an anchor for SUI users when they submit their transactions. As for Shardeum, not much details about its gas fee pricing mechanism is available though the blockchain aims to provide low gas fees forever with the target being ₹1-2 per transaction.
From an economical point of view, the use of blockchain networks with lower gas fees is certainly the way to go as lower gas fees would result in lower expenditure of transaction costs. The resultant greater efficiency gains for users of a network is always a positive when it comes to economics.
In line with the size of their respective ecosystems, the communities of Aptos and SUI are of almost the same size whereas for Shardeum its community on Twitter and Discord is playing catch up with those of Aptos and SUI. In addition to the adage the more the merrier, community members of a blockchain network can also find strength in their numbers.
The Solana ecosystem has emerged as the most popular blockchain ecosystem so far this year, accounting for 49.3% of global cryptocurrency investor interest in the specific chain.
JinseFinanceIn the long run, I think the future of Ethereum will be a combination of "L1 blockchain + L2 system equivalent to L1 trustless" (hereinafter referred to as "L1+L2"), especially when ZK Rollup solves the problem of general intelligence After contract platform technology.
JinseFinanceTPS reaches 10,000+, financing reaches 19 million US dollars: Will L1 dark horse Monad disappoint people after it goes online?
JinseFinanceThe competition in Alt L1 has become fierce. Near has launched a DA solution and Sui’s TVL has been rising. Only Ethereum is still unhurriedly upgrading its main network. Two major competition points have emerged in L2: parallel EVM and decentralized sequencer.
JinseFinanceThe last decade of cryptocurrencies has been a boom in “blockspace” commodities, and this boom is likely to continue for the next 5-10 years.
JinseFinanceThis is primarily done so that Terra Classic can compete with other blockchains.
OthersA blockchain bridge connects two blockchains facilitating secure and verifiable communication between those blockchains through the transfer of information and/or assets.
Enterprise Ethereum AllianceThe feature allows users to stake tokens, transfer NFTs and conduct transactions with an in-browser wallet application.
CoindeskSustainability can be simply defined as the protocol staying online, resilient to attacks, and usable under all conditions. It also needs to be relevant and keep up with contemporary needs, so to speak.
CointelegraphThese discussions are fueled by the massive funding rounds of two new L1 unicorns, Aptos and Sui, with teams and structures drawn from Meta’s now-defunct Diem and Novi projects.
Cointelegraph