For years, transactions per second (TPS) has been the headline metric used to measure blockchain performance. It's simple, catchy, and easy to compare: Bitcoin does about 4–7 TPS, Solana claims 65,000 in benchmark tests, and newer chains boast figures nearing 300,000 — at least in theory. But as blockchain technology evolves, a growing number of experts are questioning whether TPS is still relevant — or if it's become a misleading, easily manipulated number that tells us very little about real-world utility.
While TPS made sense in the early days of crypto — when blockchains were primarily used for peer-to-peer payments — the rise of smart contracts, layer-2 scaling, and account abstraction has complicated the landscape. Today’s transactions vary wildly in computational complexity, making a one-size-fits-all metric like TPS increasingly inadequate.
The Rise and Fall of TPS as a Key Metric
In the Bitcoin era, transaction simplicity ruled. Sending BTC from one wallet to another was the primary use case. Back then, TPS was a legitimate way to gauge scalability. If crypto were to replace traditional payment systems like Visa — which handles around 1,700 TPS — networks needed to scale accordingly.
But Ethereum changed the game. With programmable smart contracts, a single transaction could trigger multiple operations — swapping tokens, minting NFTs, or executing DeFi strategies — all in one go. Suddenly, counting "transactions" no longer reflected the actual computational load on the network.
“TPS is like counting rice grains in a meal and claiming one dish is better because it has more grains.”
— A growing sentiment among blockchain performance analysts
As networks evolved, so did transaction types. Simple transfers now coexist with complex smart contract executions, staking votes, and automated bot activity. Yet under TPS, they’re all counted equally — one transaction, one count.
👉 Discover how real blockchain performance is measured beyond marketing hype.
The Problem with Real-World TPS Claims
Solana’s much-publicized 65,000 TPS figure is a prime example of the gap between theory and reality. While the number sounds impressive, real-world throughput hovers around 3,000 TPS, and even that includes a large volume of non-user activity — like consensus votes from validators.
Critics argue that up to 90% of Solana’s reported transactions are system-level operations, not user-driven actions. While Solana’s team defends this — noting that votes are legitimate, fee-paying transactions — the debate highlights a deeper issue: what counts as a “real” transaction?
Austin Federa, Solana’s head of strategy, acknowledges the complexity:
“Solana today is powering many more complex transactions than it was in 2021 — even though the number of transactions per second hasn’t gone up astronomically.”
A single arbitrage trade or NFT mint can consume 100 times more computational resources than a simple SOL transfer. Yet under TPS, both register as “1 transaction.”
How Blockchain Metrics Are Gamed
The temptation to inflate TPS is real. Some networks run stress tests using minimal “no-op” transactions — transfers that do nothing or send tiny amounts back and forth. These require negligible computation but boost TPS numbers artificially.
Neil Davies, a systems performance scientist at Input Output (Cardano’s developer), calls this practice misleading:
“Chains that count inter-node messaging as transactions are measuring overhead, not user value.”
This kind of benchmarking may look good in press releases, but it tells investors and developers little about actual network capacity or user experience.
Even Ethereum layer-2 solutions like Arbitrum report a modest 9.95 TPS on-chain — but claim potential for 40,000 TPS under optimal conditions. The gap underscores how context matters: are we measuring user activity, system load, or theoretical maximums?
Emerging Alternatives to TPS
As criticism grows, new metrics are emerging to better reflect blockchain performance.
User Operations (UserOps) Per Second
With Ethereum’s ERC-4337 account abstraction standard, users can bundle multiple actions — approvals, swaps, and transfers — into a single “UserOp.” This improves user experience but further distorts TPS.
Anthony Rose of Matter Labs (zkSync) argues that UserOps per second (UOPS) could be more meaningful:
“As account abstraction spreads, TPS becomes even less relevant.”
However, UOPS has limitations. It’s Ethereum-centric and doesn’t translate well to non-EVM chains. Worse, it may incentivize unnecessary complexity — rewarding networks that require more steps to complete simple tasks.
Gas Per Second (GPS)
A more promising alternative is gas per second (GPS) — a metric that measures computational throughput based on actual resource consumption.
On Ethereum, gas reflects the cost of executing operations. GPS aggregates this over time, offering a clearer picture of how much work a network can handle per second.
Avihu Levy, CPO of StarkWare, believes GPS is the future:
“If you know your network can process X gas per second, you can compare computational capacity across chains — assuming standardized benchmarks.”
But standardization remains a hurdle. Solana uses Compute Units, Aptos uses gas units, and Starknet measures work in Cairo steps. Without a common benchmark, cross-chain GPS comparisons remain difficult.
👉 See how next-gen blockchains are redefining performance measurement.
Why TPS Still Dominates — For Now
Despite its flaws, TPS remains popular because it’s simple and widely understood. Most investors and users don’t have the technical background to interpret GPS or UOPS. As Anthony Rose puts it:
“There’s a trade-off between explainability and accuracy.”
Until the market matures, TPS will likely stay the default metric — even if it’s flawed.
Moreover, as blockchain technology improves, raw speed may become less important. Austin Federa compares it to personal computers:
“The success of the PC industry is that you don’t have to care about the specs anymore.”
The goal isn’t infinite TPS — it’s invisible infrastructure. When all chains are fast enough for everyday use, users won’t need to compare numbers at all.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Is TPS completely useless for evaluating blockchains?
Not entirely. TPS can still offer a rough idea of throughput, especially for payment-focused chains like Bitcoin or Litecoin. However, for smart contract platforms, it should be supplemented with other metrics like fees, finality time, and computational capacity.
What makes a transaction “complex” on a blockchain?
Complexity depends on the number of operations executed — such as token swaps, contract calls, or data storage. A simple transfer uses minimal gas; a DeFi trade involving multiple pools and approvals uses significantly more.
Can we compare GPS across different blockchains?
Not directly — yet. Each chain measures computation differently. However, creating standardized benchmarks (like a common “hello world” smart contract test) could enable fair comparisons in the future.
Why do some blockchains report such high TPS in tests?
High benchmark numbers often come from stress tests using low-compute transactions (e.g., sending tiny amounts repeatedly). These don’t reflect real-world usage but are useful for stress-testing network limits.
Will account abstraction make TPS obsolete?
It will certainly reduce its relevance. As more actions are bundled into single UserOps, TPS will underrepresent actual user activity. New metrics like UOPS or GPS will be needed to capture true performance.
What should investors focus on instead of TPS?
Look at user activity, on-chain revenue, developer engagement, fee sustainability, and decentralization metrics. Real adoption matters more than theoretical speed.
👉 Explore blockchain networks that prioritize real utility over inflated metrics.
The Bottom Line
TPS was never perfect — but it was useful in a simpler era of blockchain. Today, with complex smart contracts, layer-2 rollups, and account abstraction reshaping how users interact with chains, relying solely on TPS is misleading.
While no single replacement metric has emerged yet, the industry is moving toward more nuanced measures like GPS and UOPS. The future of blockchain performance evaluation lies not in flashy headlines, but in meaningful, user-centric metrics that reflect real utility.
Until then, take every “65,000 TPS” claim with a grain of salt — and look beyond the numbers.
Core Keywords: blockchain transactions per second (TPS), smart contract chains, layer-2 scaling, account abstraction, gas per second (GPS), UserOps per second (UOPS), blockchain performance metrics