The recent podcast episode by Blankless featuring Lei Yang and Keone Hon has sparked extensive discussion on MegaETH versus Monad, particularly around the definition of a Full Node.
This article will delve into the origins and development of MegaETH and Monad, provide an analysis of each, and offer perspectives on their future.
MegaETH vs Monad
The podcast discussion on MegaETH and Monad centers on their similarities and differences, their approaches to decentralization and censorship resistance, and the definition of Full Nodes.
Similarities and Differences Between MegaETH and Monad
The primary similarity between MegaETH and Monad is their shared goal of high-performance public blockchains. Both acknowledge that Ethereum Layer1’s transaction throughput of 10-15 transactions per second is inadequate for current industry needs. Despite some performance limitations, EVM remains a critical standard, and both projects choose to build on EVM due to its established market validation.
Differences between MegaETH and Monad are primarily in:
- Goals: MegaETH aims for extreme performance, while Monad seeks to maximize performance with minimal hardware requirements while maintaining decentralization.
- Architecture: MegaETH found that achieving extreme performance while balancing decentralization is impractical with Layer1, leading them to build on ETH Layer2 with some optimizations. Monad, on the other hand, focuses on building a new Layer1 to ensure decentralization and optimize various structural aspects like databases, efficiency, execution, and algorithms.
Implementation of Decentralization and Censorship Resistance
Both MegaETH and Monad considered how to maintain decentralization while achieving high performance.
Monad optimizes hardware and network settings to allow easy node operation, lowering the participation threshold and realizing the ideal of “anyone can run a node.” In contrast, MegaETH splits Full Node responsibilities into roles such as sorter, prover, and full node to reduce hardware demands and enhance decentralization, while relying on Ethereum Layer1 for its decentralized foundation.
Monad places stronger emphasis on decentralization, while MegaETH relies on Ethereum Layer1’s proven security and focuses more on performance.
Definition of Full Node
The discussion on decentralization highlighted differences in the definition of a Full Node. Lei Yang of MegaETH refers to a Full Node as one that synchronizes the latest system state but doesn’t execute all transactions, while Keone Hon of Monad defines it as a node capable of accessing all states and executing all transactions. The discrepancy arises from different starting points and the lack of prior knowledge about MegaETH’s node splitting.
Introduction and Analysis of MegaETH and Monad
MegaETH and Monad represent emerging high-performance public blockchains. This section will analyze their technical features, community culture, and pros and cons to better understand their positioning and development direction.
MegaETH: Enhancing Performance Through Node Specialization
MegaETH’s key innovation is the specialization of node roles, reducing hardware requirements and increasing overall performance. It introduces:
- Real-time EVM Engine: Processes transactions rapidly and reliably within 10 milliseconds.
- Just-In-Time Compilation: Converts smart contracts to native machine code for up to 100x performance improvement.
- State Tree Improvement: Replaces the Merkle Patricia Trie with a new state tree, reducing disk I/O and improving scalability.
- State Synchronization Protocol: Efficiently propagates state updates to Full Nodes, even in low-connectivity scenarios.
MegaETH also focuses on community engagement, using its mascot and various initiatives to build a sense of belonging and support for developers.
Monad: Breaking Through Ethereum’s Architectural Limits
Monad’s core innovation lies in deep architectural optimization, enhancing transaction processing efficiency and reducing participation barriers. It introduces:
- Parallel Execution: Processes tasks concurrently, addressing issues in state storage, transaction handling, and distributed consensus.
- MonadBFT: An efficient consensus mechanism for parallel execution.
- Delayed Execution: Improves transaction processing efficiency by validating before execution.
- MonadDB: Innovates on database design for better state access efficiency.
Monad’s community is active, with a distinct brand image and engagement strategies that do not rely on task platforms or testnet nodes.
Summary
MegaETH and Monad each advance blockchain networks through different approaches. MegaETH enhances performance with node specialization and optimization while maintaining Ethereum’s decentralization. Monad, focusing on decentralization and lowering hardware barriers, optimizes the underlying architecture.
It’s challenging to determine which is superior as they have different goals and approaches—MegaETH as Layer2 and Monad as Layer1. However, the high-performance public blockchain space is likely to be a significant trend in the industry’s future, addressing current inefficiencies and supporting the development of high-frequency DApps.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
