When evaluating blockchain networks, layer-1 performance is a critical factor that influences scalability, user experience, and real-world adoption. In this in-depth analysis, we compare six major blockchain platforms—Ethereum, Cardano, Solana, Avalanche, Algorand, and Internet Computer—based on key layer-1 metrics such as transactions per second (TPS), time to finality, transaction fees, and network design tradeoffs.
While layer-2 scaling solutions are gaining traction—especially for Ethereum and Cardano—we focus exclusively on on-chain, layer-1 capabilities to provide a clear benchmark of native performance.
Key Metrics for Blockchain Performance
To conduct a meaningful comparison, we evaluate each blockchain using the following core metrics:
- Transactions Per Second (TPS): Measures throughput under both theoretical and real-world conditions.
- Time to Finality: How quickly a transaction becomes irreversible.
- Transaction Fees: Average cost per transaction.
- Decentralization & Security Tradeoffs: Permissionless vs. permissioned validation, node distribution.
- Scalability Roadmap: Whether the project focuses on layer-1 or layer-2 improvements.
These factors collectively determine how efficiently a blockchain can support decentralized applications (dApps), DeFi protocols, NFT marketplaces, and everyday transactions.
Ethereum: Security Over Speed
Ethereum remains the most widely used smart contract platform, prioritizing security and decentralization over raw speed.
- Theoretical TPS: ~119 (under ideal conditions)
- Actual TPS: ~14
- Finality Time: ~15 minutes (2 epochs)
- Avg. Fee: ~$10–$20 during peak times
- Node Count: Over 800,000 (highly decentralized)
While Ethereum’s layer-1 throughput is modest, its robust ecosystem benefits from layer-2 rollups like Arbitrum, Optimism, and Base, which handle the majority of user activity at lower cost and higher speed.
👉 Discover how high-performance networks are reshaping decentralized finance.
Ethereum’s roadmap includes Single Slot Finality (SSF), which aims to reduce finality time to just seconds—potentially revolutionizing responsiveness without compromising security.
Cardano: Methodical Growth with Future Scalability
Cardano emphasizes academic rigor and long-term sustainability.
- Theoretical TPS: ~386
- Actual TPS: ~2
- Finality Time: 2–25 minutes (practical), 12 hours (guaranteed)
- Avg. Fee: ~$0.15
- Node Count: ~3,000 stake pools
Despite low current usage, Cardano has significant headroom for growth. Its upcoming Hydra layer-2 solution promises to scale to millions of TPS through off-chain state channels.
Finality on Cardano is nuanced: while full cryptographic finality takes 2,160 blocks (~12 hours), most transactions are considered settled within minutes for practical purposes.
Solana: High-Speed Layer-1 Champion
Solana is engineered for maximum performance at the base layer.
- Theoretical TPS: ~65,000 (in tests)
- Actual TPS: ~1,000 (excluding vote transactions)
- Finality Time: ~12 seconds (after 31 confirmations)
- Avg. Fee: ~$0.00025
- Node Count: ~1,800
Solana achieves high throughput via innovations like Proof of History (PoH) and parallelized execution. However, its performance comes with tradeoffs—occasional network outages have raised concerns about reliability.
The upcoming Firedancer client, developed by Jump Crypto, aims to enhance stability and throughput even further upon mainnet launch.
👉 See how next-gen blockchains are pushing transaction limits.
Avalanche: Subnet-Powered Flexibility
Avalanche offers a unique multi-chain architecture with customizable subnets.
- Theoretical TPS: No official figure post-2024; previously cited as 4,500
Actual TPS:
- C-Chain only: ~3.5
- Full network (incl. subnets): ~15.5
- Finality Time: ~1 second
- Avg. Fee: ~$0.10
- Node Count: Thousands across subnets
Avalanche stands out with sub-second finality thanks to its consensus protocol. While base-layer throughput is modest, its subnet model allows enterprises and dApps to create dedicated blockchains with tailored performance.
Algorand: Instant Finality and Efficiency
Algorand focuses on speed, low cost, and sustainability.
- Theoretical TPS: ~6,000 (post-upgrade 3.9)
- Actual TPS: ~30
- Finality Time: ~3 seconds (block interval)
- Avg. Fee: ~$0.0008
- Node Count: ~1,400
Algorand achieves near-instant finality through its pure Proof-of-Stake model. With minimal fees and strong energy efficiency, it appeals to eco-conscious developers and institutions.
Unlike Ethereum or Cardano, Algorand relies primarily on layer-1 upgrades rather than layer-2 solutions for scaling.
Internet Computer: Performance Through Permissioned Design
The Internet Computer positions itself as a high-performance alternative.
- Theoretical TPS: ~11,500
- Actual TPS: ~6,000
- Finality Time: ~1–2 seconds
- Avg. Fee: ~$0.0012 (ICP transfers)
- Node Count: Limited; requires permission to run a node
Internet Computer delivers impressive throughput and fast finality by operating a more centralized, permissioned validator set. This design enables cloud-like performance but raises questions about decentralization—a key philosophical pillar of blockchain technology.
While technically capable, its governance model differs significantly from permissionless peers like Ethereum or Solana.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is the fastest blockchain in terms of finality?
A: Avalanche leads with finality in about one second. Algorand and Internet Computer also offer sub-three-second finality.
Q: Which blockchain has the highest actual transaction throughput?
A: Solana currently processes around 1,000 real transactions per second—highest among the six when excluding vote traffic.
Q: Is higher TPS always better?
A: Not necessarily. High throughput often involves tradeoffs in decentralization or security. A balanced design suits most real-world applications better than extreme speed alone.
Q: Why does Ethereum have low TPS despite high usage?
A: Ethereum prioritizes decentralization and security. Most high-volume activity occurs on layer-2 rollups, keeping layer-1 secure and stable.
Q: Can blockchains improve performance without sacrificing decentralization?
A: Projects are exploring solutions like sharding (Ethereum), recursive scaling (Cardano Hydra), and optimized consensus (Avalanche). True breakthroughs will balance all three—speed, security, and decentralization.
Q: Are theoretical TPS numbers realistic?
A: No. Theoretical maximums assume ideal conditions—simple transactions, no congestion, perfect network sync. Real-world performance is typically far lower.
Final Thoughts: Performance Isn’t Everything
While raw speed captures attention, the best blockchain for you depends on your priorities:
- Need ecosystem maturity? Ethereum leads.
- Want ultra-low fees and high speed? Consider Solana or Algorand.
- Prioritize customizability? Avalanche’s subnets offer flexibility.
- Value decentralization above all? Be cautious with permissioned models like Internet Computer.
👉 Explore top-performing networks transforming the future of Web3.
Ultimately, blockchain performance must be evaluated holistically—balancing speed, security, cost, decentralization, and long-term vision. As layer-1 innovations continue evolving, the line between theoretical potential and real-world utility will grow ever thinner.
Keywords: layer 1 blockchain performance, transactions per second (TPS), blockchain finality time, Solana vs Ethereum speed, high-performance blockchains, scalable blockchain networks, fastest blockchain 2025