A recent study by Taraxa reveals that many blockchain networks exaggerate their transaction speeds, often reporting figures that are 20 times higher than real-world performance. Sonic (formerly Fantom) was found to inflate its throughput by over 100 times , raising concerns about transparency in the industry. The study highlights a major gap between theoretical and actual transaction per second (TPS) capabilities on blockchain mainnets. Popular networks like Solana, Aptos, and Sonic promote high TPS figures, but the research suggests these numbers rarely hold up in real-world conditions. Taraxa, a Layer-1 blockchain , conducted an in-depth analysis, showing that many projects base their performance claims on ideal test environments. These figures often fail to reflect actual network conditions, where validator node costs and technical limitations impact efficiency. " Investors , developers, and users deserve transparency," said Taraxa co-founder Steven Pu . He criticized the industry’s reliance on lab-generated figures, arguing that real-world performance should be the standard. To measure this, Taraxa introduced the "TPS per dollar" metric, comparing a network’s transactions per second to the cost of running a validator node. This method provides a clearer picture of blockchain efficiency, revealing that many networks require expensive hardware to achieve relatively modest transaction speeds. While some blockchains can process transactions quickly, the associated costs often make these claims misleading. To ensure accuracy, the study excluded permissioned and sharded networks, as well as certain transaction types like voting transactions, which can artificially boost TPS figures. When comparing actual throughput to publicized claims, the results showed systematic overestimation across the industry. Sonic stood out with the largest discrepancy, overstating its TPS by more than 100 times . On average, most networks exaggerated their speeds by a factor of 20 . This kind of marketing distortion is fueled by fierce competition in the Layer-1 blockchain space, where high-performance claims attract investors and developers. “Our research also found that some networks demand high-end hardware just to deliver basic transaction speeds,” Pu explained. “This raises concerns about decentralization and accessibility, as these systems become expensive to operate.” The study also examined cost efficiency , revealing that Solana had the highest hardware expenses but effectively used these resources to maintain strong throughput. Meanwhile, Taraxa claimed to have the best efficiency ratio in the industry, though its involvement in the study raises questions about its objectivity. Despite potential self-promotion, the findings indicate that blockchain throughput across the industry is largely inflated. Taraxa has been conducting research into various Web3 sectors, including AI, and its reports provide valuable insights into real-world blockchain performance. This study highlights the need for honest reporting in the blockchain space. As the industry matures, greater emphasis on verifiable data could push projects to offer more realistic claims, ensuring that users and investors get a clearer picture of network capabilities.
