Blockchain technology isn’t just about crypto anymore — it’s transforming how we interact with systems and applications. From enabling DeFi to powering supply chain transparency, this technology has reshaped the rules of trust. But what really drives blockchain innovation under the hood?
At the core of this revolution are Virtual Machines (VMs) — the engines that execute smart contracts, enabling automation and innovation across these ecosystems. The introduction of VMs has marked a pivotal moment in the evolution of blockchain technology, transforming it from a simple peer-to-peer transaction network into a platform capable of supporting complex applications (DeFi as we know it today).
Ethereum’s Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) pioneered the space, setting a benchmark that was soon adopted by other blockchains. But as demand for speed and scalability grows, Ethereum isn’t the only contender.
A lot has been spoken about Solana; a high-performance blockchain that achieves unparalleled transaction speeds, thanks to its powerhouse — the Solana Virtual Machine (SVM). Unlike the sequential EVM, the SVM’s parallel processing revolutionizes blockchain performance. The keywords are sequential and parallel.
But how does SVM work, and what sets it apart from the tried-and-tested EVM?
Let’s dive into what makes SVM tick and how it’s challenging the established dominance of the EVM.
To know more about Virtual Machines and the Ethereum Virtual Machine check out our previous article linked here.
What is the Solana Virtual Machine?
At the heart of Solana’s lightning-fast blockchain is its SVM — a crucial engine that processes all transactions and smart contracts on the network. The SVM is what powers dApps, but what makes it stand out is its ability to process thousands of transactions simultaneously (made possible by Sealevel).
This contrasts with the EVM, where transactions are processed sequentially. The SVM’s parallel processing capability is one of the key factors behind Solana’s high throughput and low transaction fees.
Sealevel and Parallel Transaction Processing
When multiple transactions affect the same account simultaneously — such as one transaction adding funds to a wallet while another withdrawing — Sealevel addresses potential conflicts during parallel execution. It manages these dependencies by specifying which parts of the blockchain’s state each transaction will modify. This allows the system to identify and process independent transactions concurrently, while dependent ones are handled in sequence to prevent errors. This approach helps maintain data integrity and the overall performance of the blockchain.
To oversimplify, Sealevel enables different smart contracts to be processed at the same time, provided they don’t need the same data.
Difference between SVM & EVM
While both EVM and SVM serve as the computational engines of their respective blockchains, they operate in fundamentally different ways, reflecting their unique design philosophies.
The EVM Approach: Single-Threaded and Sequential
The EVM processes transactions in a sequential, single-threaded manner. Imagine you have a smart contract that needs to transfer funds from one account to another. On Ethereum, this transaction is stored within the specific contract’s storage. While effective, it can create bottlenecks. If two contracts try to access or modify the same account balance simultaneously, it can lead to conflicts. This is partly because the EVM operates within a single-threaded runtime environment and can only process one contract at a time, leaving other cores of the validator’s hardware underutilized.
The SVM Approach: Multi-Threaded and Parallel
The SVM employs a multi-threaded, parallel approach. It separates data, such as user balances, for improved organization and efficiency. Before execution, transactions on Solana must specify the data they will access or modify. This structure enables SVM to run multiple transactions in parallel, as long as they don’t interact with the same data. For example, one transaction might transfer funds between two users while another unrelated transaction is processed simultaneously. The parallel processing capability allows SVM to utilize all available cores of the validator’s hardware, maximizing throughput and efficiency.
Implications of These Approaches
The EVM’s single-threaded design contributes to network congestion and higher transaction fees, particularly during peak usage. This is evident in Ethereum’s global fee markets, where unrelated transactions can drive up costs for one another. On the other hand, SVM’s architecture supports localized fee markets, assigning fees per smart contract rather than globally. This, combined with SVM’s ability to process transactions in parallel, results in lower fees and faster processing times.
However, the SVM too has its challenges. One of the main issues is maintaining stability and security during parallel processing. While the approach is efficient, it requires careful management to prevent errors, especially when multiple transactions try to modify the same data at the same time. This adds complexity to the system.
Another challenge is the use of the Rust programming language. While powerful, Rust is harder to learn than the more widely used Solidity (used by Ethereum).
Conclusion: Parallel Roads to the Future
EVM and SVM both represent different approaches to the same goal: enabling dApps to run smoothly and efficiently on a blockchain. While EVM has been the cornerstone of decentralized development with its robust ecosystem and proven reliability, SVM emerges as a powerful contender with its parallel processing capabilities and lightning-fast transaction speeds. The choice often comes down to the specific needs of a project.
Someone has described it so effortlessly, “Think of an EVM like a single cashier at a store, serving one customer at a time. If you’re in a hurry, you can pay extra to skip the line. In contrast, the SVM operates like a supermarket with multiple checkout lanes, where several customers can be served simultaneously, reducing wait times and speeding up the entire process”.
So, as the landscape evolves, the question remains: Will developers prioritize the EVM’s stability and massive ecosystem, or embrace the SVM’s blazing speed and innovative architecture? Time and use cases will push the limits.
If you find this helpful, please support us by subscribing/ following.
Everythingblockchain — Freethinkers, Writers ✍, Blockchain explorers 🔭
In pursuit of simplifying the different blocks of the chain metaverse
Socials
The information provided through this work is intended solely for educational purposes and must not be treated as investment advice. Any lapses in presenting any of the information correctly are ours alone. We disclaim any liability associated with the use of this content.
Thanks, this was helpful