Polkadot VS Ethereum: Two equal chances to dominate the Web3 world?

For most casual digital asset investors, the Ethereum 2.0 upgrade promises to be a game-changer by improving efficiency, reducing network costs, and propelling the entire blockchain and crypto space. towards a Web3 reality.

Ethereum has faced a lack of scalability and skyrocketing gas fees, and as it serves as the largest platform for developing smart contracts and DApps, the move to a proof-of-stake (PoS) blockchain ) more reliable and scalable will be a welcome respite.

However, unbeknownst to most casual investors, Polkadot’s Substrate platform has made massive strides in developing a parallel decentralized internet infrastructure that many believe will eventually eclipse that of Ethereum.

Since the publication of the Polkadot whitepaper, its value as a bridge between the Ethereum ecosystem and the many possibilities that constitute a Web3 Internet experience has been at the forefront of Polkadot’s main selling points.

So how exactly does Polkadot compare to Ethereum? What is Ethereum’s current progression towards a decentralized internet, and have Polkadot’s parachains become a viable threat to the mainstream smart contract network? Here is a brief overview of the technical details that differentiate Polkadot’s ecosystem from the upcoming Ethereum upgrade.

Two Paths to Decentralized Internet

To understand the value Polkadot brings to the table, we first need to compare Polkadot’s substrate and how it differs from what Ethereum currently offers. This may interest you: Future of the 2 Queen crypto-currencies: Ethereum (ETH) and Bitcoin (BTC) price prediction.

It is undeniable that at one time, Ethereum was considered a breakthrough technology and a sought-after platform for DApp development. Over the years, however, scalability has become Ethereum’s Achilles’ heel. With an estimated 1 million transactions per day, the Ethereum blockchain is only capable of processing 15 transactions per second (TPS), resulting in volatile gas fees. Although this figure is set to increase with the upgrade to Ethereum 2.0, it is still far below traditional centralized infrastructures such as Visa, which can theoretically process more than 1,700 TPS.

In addition to the slowness and congestion of its network, Ethereum’s outdated consensus algorithms consume up to 112.15 TWh per year, which is comparable to the electricity consumption of Portugal or the Netherlands. Simply put, Ethereum relies heavily on a proof-of-work (PoW) algorithm that requires computationally intensive mining to add new blocks to the chain and confirm transactions.

Ethereum 2.0 plans to address these concerns by moving from a PoW algorithm to a more efficient PoS algorithm, which will allow Ethereum to become carbon neutral and achieve greater speed.

Ethereum 2.0 will also use sharding as a scaling solution. The network will be divided into small pieces that can process transactions in parallel. In theory, this will allow Ethereum to process an infinite number of transactions per second, but in practice it will be limited by the number of shards created.

As of today, the move to Ethereum 2.0 is still ongoing, although the test network is up and running. Frustrated by the delays, developers of ambitious projects like Ethereum co-founder Gavin Wood left Ethereum to create the Web3 Foundation and Parity Technologies. Parity Technologies and the Web3 Foundation are primarily focused on the development of three core technologies: Parity Ethereum (also known as Serenity), Parity Substrate, and Polkadot.

Ultimately, the goal of these organizations and projects is to accelerate the implementation of the Web3 vision.

Their victories and their defeats

As a core blockchain infrastructure company, Parity Technologies provides several tools and software that allow developers to launch their blockchains quickly and easily. See also: Cryptocurrency Price Prediction Today: Polkadot, SafeMoon & Algorand. The Parity Substrate is a toolkit for building custom blockchains from scratch, and it powers some of the most popular blockchains in the world, like Polkadot, Kraken, and Chainlink.

Parity Ethereum, on the other hand, is the software that powers Ethereum 2.0 clients such as Geth and Prysm. Parity’s main contribution to Polkadot is the Substrate framework, which is used to build custom blockchains or parachains on top of the Polkadot relay chain.

Compared to Ethereum’s existing system as well as its future sharding framework, Substrate is highly modular and allows custom blockchains to be built. Developers can choose the features they want for their parachains up to the degree of technical difficulty they can handle.

Here are some examples of how the functions of blockchains built with Substrate can differ:

As a result, Substrate allows users to assemble a few palettes and launch their chains in less than an hour, which is much easier than starting from scratch. In the future, they could be far superior to Ethereum in performing specific tasks. See also: Ethereum: BitMex co-founder thinks it will hit $10,000 by the end of the year. Additionally, they can still communicate easily using XCMP, a cross-consensus message format developed for Polkadot that allows interaction between networks that share the same relay chain.

Substrate also provides developers with a library of modules that can be used to create compatibility between new blockchains and old chains such as Bitcoin and Ethereum. What’s more, you don’t even have to create blockchains that connect to Polkadot to use Substrate. In other words, any developer can use Substrate to create forkless blockchains that can be upgraded without the need for hard forks and on any ecosystem outside of Polkadot or Ethereum.

When it comes to validators, Polkadot uses a Nash equilibrium staking game that incentivizes validators to behave in the best possible way for the network as a whole. This differs from Ethereum’s current focus on rewarding miners for their efforts, which often leads to centralization and high barriers to entry.

The Polkadot relay chain is also designed to be much more scalable than Ethereum’s, with the ability to process around 1,000 transactions per second, compared to just 15 for Ethereum.

Perhaps the only flaw in Polkadot’s armor is the fact that Parity Technologies experienced a major security breach in its multi-sig wallet software in 2017, when over $30 million worth of ETH was stolen from multiple multi-sig wallets.

No confrontation, but complementarity

Ultimately, Polkadot is a complementary platform to Ethereum, as both blockchain ecosystems pursue the same goal of providing a fully decentralized World Wide Web.

Although Polkadot boasts a ton of features and improved capacity, it’s still in its infancy, with only a handful of apps (Moonbeam and Moonriver) running on its network. At the same time, Ethereum continues to be a jack-of-all-trades, with hundreds of thousands of developers and projects giving it a significant edge in terms of adoption.

Polkadot and Ethereum both serve different purposes and can co-exist and complement each other in a decentralized future.

A glimpse of the future

Polkadot and Ethereum have their own strengths and weaknesses. Developers could use Substrate to build decentralized social media platforms or video-sharing apps that integrate Ethereum’s ERC-20 token economy. With an increasing number of developers arriving to accelerate the move to a Web3 internet, it is unclear what the future holds for Polkadot and Ethereum.

💎 Open an account for free to Invest in crypto!

CoinHouse allows you to easily invest in crypto-assets. Creating an account is free and takes just a few simple steps.

📈 Trade cryptos online in just a few clicks!

eToro allows you to trade cryptocurrency easily online. Creating an account is free and very simple.

68% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs with this provider. You should ask yourself if you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money. eToro users in France cannot open positions to buy real crypto assets, all orders are opened as CFDs.

Thomas Estimbre
Latest articles by Thomas Estimbre (see everything)

Leave a Comment