The NEAR vs Solana race boils down to performance, stability, and application ecosystem. While NEAR Protocol and Solana have a lot in common, like the programming language, low gas fees, and Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism, they have different target applications and architecture. 

Today, we’ll examine what sets them apart and try to determine the winner. 

‍

Scalability and Performance 

Solana has a theoretical peak of 65,000 transactions per second (TPS), but its real-world performance often falls short, averaging around 3,000 TPS.

Moreover, Solana experienced multiple outages – notably, in February 2023, when the network was down for 18 hours. The most recent outage happened in February 2024 and lasted for four hours. 

While system shutdowns have become less common in recent years, it’s a problem that has no fix. On the other hand, NEAR boasts 100% uptime, which means it has never suffered disruptions since its launch in 2020. 

NEAR can process about 10,000 TPS, significantly fewer than Solana. Still, that’s much faster than Ethereum or Bitcoin, which handle under 15 TPS without Layer-2 solutions. NEAR developers are working on improving the network’s performance and claim it will be able to process 100,000 TPS in the future. 

‍

Consensus Algorithm 

Both Solana and NEAR rely on PoS to verify transactions, where users lock up their tokens to become validators and earn rewards. 

However, Solana uses Proof-of-History (PoH) to timestamp transactions. Each node independently records time, creating a tamper-proof ledger of events. 

Meanwhile, NEAR developed its proprietary sharding solution Nightshade to make the consensus more efficient. It divides data into smaller pieces and distributes it across multiple nodes for greater scalability. 

Another distinction is the level of centralization. Solana has a maximum of 1,800 validators, while NEAR has only 100. However, in practice, transactions on Solana are usually verified by approximately 150 validators.

‍

Programing Language 

Solana supports Rust and C/C++ for smart contract development and Python for interface and application development. Additionally, it offers numerous community-contributed SDKs that allow development in other languages, Like JavaScript and Go. 

NEAR allows on-chain programming on Rust, AssemblyScript, and Java. Its Smart Contract Audit Program provides a standardized framework for smart contract reviews to enhance the network’s security and streamline development. 

‍

Smart Contract Capabilities 

Solana’s Rust foundation gives it two key advantages: security and speed. Rust is very picky about how code handles data, which helps prevent common mistakes that can lead to security problems like accidentally deleting important information or trying to use data that doesn't exist. 

Moreover, Rust's concurrency model allows it to efficiently manage multiple tasks simultaneously without compromising data integrity.

Since NEAR also uses Rust, it shares Solana’s benefits. Additionally, NEAR is actively working on interoperability solutions for cross-chain communication. For example, the Rainbow Bridge connects NEAR and Ethereum for direct transfers between the networks. 

‍

Ecosystem and Use Cases 

Solana’s speed and scalability earned it popularity for high-performance applications like DeFi platforms and P2E games. 

Despite the recent surge in memecoin activity on the network, Solana itself remains focused on practical applications. For instance, its recent development Solana Actions introduces new real-world use cases like retail transactions. 

NEAR is a developer-friendly platform prioritizing scalability and user experience. Its sharding technology enables high throughput and low transaction fees, making it equally suitable for demanding applications as Solana.

Unlike Solana, NEAR isn’t as commonly used for meme and GameFi projects. Instead, it hosts stablecoins like USDC and USDT and utility tokens like LINK and GRT. Developers favor it for the ability to develop complex smart contracts and interoperability. 

Since its launch in 2017, Solana has surpassed $4.7B in total value locked (TVL) and now ranks third among top blockchains. Meanwhile, NEAR’s TVL doesn’t exceed $1B, highlighting the gap in adoption. 

‍

Token Standard 

Unlike Ethereum's ERC-20 and ERC-721, Solana uses a single SPL token standard for both fungible and non-fungible assets. This unified approach, coupled with metadata-based token definitions, improves compatibility across the ecosystem.

The NEAR token standard has no specific name. However, like SPL, it outlines core functionalities, metadata, and provisions for consistency and compatibility. However, NEAR offers more flexibility, allowing developers to customize tokens to specific use cases.

‍

Token Economics

Solana gas fees are negligible, typically ranging from $0.003 to $0.030 depending on the network’s congestion. 

NEAR also charges low fees, but it has a more complex fee structure. NEAR uses a predictable pricing model where each action consumes a fixed amount of gas units. The final fee in NEAR tokens is calculated by multiplying gas units by a dynamic gas price, which depends on the network’s congestion.

‍

Conclusion 

Both Solana and NEAR are highly scalable, cost-efficient, and developer-friendly chains. However, Solana takes the lead in adoption, with over 4x NEAR’s TVL and a broader ecosystem. Moreover, Solana is more decentralized due to a higher number of validators. 

On the other hand, NEAR is more stable than Solana, which has experienced numerous outages throughout the years. For this reason, it’s popular for high-performance utility application development.

‍