Thread by @state_xyz

0/🧵Comparison of #Sui vs. #Aptos, other #Layer1 #blockchain projects given excitement from fundraises at unicorn+ valuations. Discussion on #technology, #tokenomics, #ecosystem

Deep dive:
medium.com/@state_xyz/mys…

TLDR below ⬇️🧵⬇️

#altcoin #cryptocurrencies #venturecapital

1/ @Mysten_Labs was formed by ex-Novi Research team at Meta, similar to @AptosLabs. Team has launched a high performance L1 PoS chain, Sui centred around scaling composable and dynamic NFTs for broad metaverse applications incl. gaming, social, commerce, etc.

2/ Like Aptos, the tech stack has made significant progress from Diem, which was originally designed to handle light payments traffic between a small number of custodial wallets (10s to 100s). Diem’s original architecture would not have been able to support mass adoption.

3.1/ However, there are many fundamental and superficial similarities between Sui and Aptos. The merits of which have been previously discussed in detail here:

https://twitter.com/state_xyz/status/1546533606847160320?s=20&t=hQAWd75Uot2UKujUZm9j8w

3.2/ Vision to solve the blockchain trilemma

3.3/ Programming language:
- Premised on Move as its native programming language, though Sui has a slightly different object model to Aptos

docs.sui.io/learn/sui-move…

3.4/ Block STM:
- Parallel transaction execution and consensus (enables low latency and higher throughput) based on Block STM — instead of ordered transactions and sequential execution of blocks in other L1 designs

https://twitter.com/austinvirts/status/1549115627536674816?s=20&t=Spew1WfiLEA7x8OCa6kxZA

3.5/ Other similarities:
- Consensus minimizes communication between validators
- State sync for optimized data availability
- SDKs, APIs for improved DX / UX
- Cap table of tier 1 VCs
- Valuation

Interesting merits (& deviations from Aptos) that stood out detailed below⬇️⬇️

4.1/ Gas mechanism:
Sui is able to keep gas prices low and predictable while incentivizing validators to optimize transaction processing and preventing DoS attacks

Validators vote on network-wide reference gas price each epoch

Predictable gas = predictable processing of txs

4.2/ Incentives are provided to validators for:
1) Complying with reference gas (high gas = penalty)
2) Being responsive (low response = penalty, reduced delegated stakes)

Gas kept low as Sui scales linearly by adding machines per validator (vs single machine per validator)

5.1/ Storage fund:
Storage fees paid into a "fund" to store on-chain data, separate to fees for tx execution (gas)

Priced exogenously in USD via governance proposals

5.2/ Fund is used to subsidize future increases in data costs for validators as Sui's network grows

Conversely, users can delete data in lieu of storage rebates, and they do so up to an economic optimum

Below is an overview of Sui's tokenomics:

6/ Other components of tokenomics:
- Supply: 10b fixed
- No deflationary/burn mechanism
- Utility of token:
1) Staking for network security
2) Tx fees
3) Storage fees
4) Governance votes
5) Medium of exchange

More details TBA

7.1/ Tx execution:

Two paths to consensus, each defined and operates according to tx type:
- Simple (majority of txs): Independent w/ no causal relationships; or
- Complex: Interdependent with shared objects

Dependencies need to be explicitly stated

Breakdown as follows...

7.2/ Simple txs:
- Uses Byzantine Consistent Broadcast
- Leaderless, eliminates global consensus overhead w/o losing safety/liveness
- Txs optimistically validated and executed individually in parallel
- Txs executed almost instantaneously
- Unaffected by faulty validators

7.3/ Complex txs:
- Uses Byzantine Fault Tolerance
- Txs executed sequentially using Narwhal (more below)
- Txs executed in 2-3 secs

8.1/ Narwhal & Tusk: Separation of mempool and consensus layers - most L1s are monolithic protocols, hindering scalability

Composable together and with other BFT consensus protocols

In theory, no known upper bound in throughput capacity

8.2/ Narwhal:
- Mempool protocol to store unconfirmed txs
- Then broadcasts txs to consensus protocol while maintaining data availability
- Able to tolerate asynchrony

8.3/ Tusk:
- Consensus protocol
- Responsible for txs ordering
- Uses shared randomness to eliminate additional communication between nodes and allows each node to determine total order of txs
- Composable with Narwhal to perform in light of faults

9/ Hardware requirements: Running a Sui node is relatively accessible compared to most L1s

There were >5,000 Sui nodes were running in 65 countries, as of June 30 2022

As testnet progresses, will update again with results when they become available

10/ Sui SDK: Interesting bridges to other ecosystems and non-crypto use cases
- Gaming APIs: Connect gaming devs directly to Sui
- SuiEcho: Bootstrapping communities from other ecosystems
- Handshake: Front-end tool for users to interact w/ merchants and P2P, without crypto exp

11/ Throughput: Pending testnet results

Current datapoints include:
- 120k TPS achieved from an unoptimized 8 core Macbook Pro
- 130k TPS when Narwhal composed w/ Hotstuff
- 160k TPS when Narwhal was composed with Tusk

12/ Ecosystem: Current state reflects @Mysten_Labs' nascency. Interestingly, @AptosLabs launched not long before but has progressed significantly in closing gap with incumbent alt L1s

13/ Team is credible, well equipped with exp, skills and resources. No doubt they will execute their vision
@EvanWeb3 @b1ackd0g @EmanAbio @GDanezis @kostascrypto

14/ While this thread compared Sui vs Aptos, both L1s fill a vacuum in the smart contract market. Should they successfully execute their plans, they are likely to be competitive post mainnet— assuming they resolve scalability pain points and provide strong DX / UX