Which Blockchain Should I use?

Blockchain technology has revolutionized the way we exchange value and information. Among the most popular blockchain networks, Ethereum, Polygon, Binance Smart Chain, and Avalanche stand out as versatile and efficient systems. In this article, we will explore the differences between these four networks and explain why Polygon is a cheaper and better alternative than Ethereum to mint NFTs.

Ethereum

Ethereum is the second-largest blockchain network after Bitcoin. It is a decentralized platform that enables smart contract functionality, allowing developers to create and deploy decentralized applications (DApps) and decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols. Ethereum’s native currency is Ether (ETH), which is used to pay for transaction fees and incentivize network validators.

One of Ethereum’s main advantages is its robust and secure infrastructure, which makes it ideal for complex smart contracts and DApps. However, Ethereum’s popularity and limited scalability have led to high transaction fees, commonly known as gas fees. The cost of gas fees varies depending on the network activity and can range from a few cents to hundreds of dollars per transaction.

Polygon

Polygon, formerly known as Matic Network, is a Layer 2 scaling solution that aims to solve Ethereum’s scalability issues. It is an open-source platform that enables faster and cheaper transactions while maintaining the security and decentralization of the Ethereum network.

Polygon achieves scalability by using sidechains and Plasma, which are Layer 2 scaling solutions that offload transactions from the Ethereum mainnet. By doing so, Polygon reduces the network congestion and gas fees, making it an attractive alternative to Ethereum for minting NFTs and other decentralized applications.

The cost of minting an NFT on Polygon is significantly lower than on Ethereum. The average gas fee on Polygon is around $0.0001, while on Ethereum, it can range from $50 to $500 depending on the complexity and network activity. Moreover, the transaction speed on Polygon is much faster, with confirmation times ranging from a few seconds to a few minutes, compared to Ethereum’s confirmation times, which can take several minutes or even hours.

Binance Smart Chain

Binance Smart Chain (BSC) is a blockchain network launched by Binance in 2020. It is a high-performance blockchain that offers smart contract functionality, low transaction fees, and fast transaction times. BSC’s native currency is Binance Coin (BNB), which is used to pay for transaction fees and incentivize network validators.

BSC’s low transaction fees and fast transaction times make it an attractive alternative to Ethereum for decentralized applications and DeFi protocols. However, BSC’s centralized nature and reliance on Binance have raised concerns about its long-term sustainability and security.

Avalanche

Avalanche is a Layer 1 blockchain network that launched in 2020. It offers high scalability, low transaction fees, and fast transaction times, making it an attractive alternative to Ethereum for decentralized applications and DeFi protocols. Avalanche’s native currency is AVAX, which is used to pay for transaction fees and incentivize network validators.

Avalanche uses a consensus mechanism called Avalanche-X, which enables fast finality and high transaction throughput. Moreover, Avalanche supports the interoperability of different blockchain networks, allowing for seamless integration with other decentralized applications and protocols.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Ethereum, Polygon, Binance Smart Chain, and Avalanche are all popular blockchain networks that offer different advantages and disadvantages. While Ethereum is a robust and secure network, its high gas fees and limited scalability have led to the emergence of alternative networks such as Polygon, Binance Smart Chain, and Avalanche.

For minting NFTs and other decentralized applications, Polygon is a cheaper and better alternative to Ethereum due to its low transaction fees and fast transaction times. However, each network has its own unique features and use cases, and developers should carefully evaluate their needs and