Blast API excels at ultra-low latency and high throughput for gaming and trading applications because it is built on a globally distributed network of bare-metal servers with proprietary optimizations. For example, Blast benchmarks its Ethereum mainnet JSON-RPC calls at sub-50ms p95 latency, significantly outperforming generalized providers. Its architecture prioritizes speed for core operations like eth_getBlockByNumber and eth_call, which is critical for real-time state synchronization in high-frequency DeFi protocols like Uniswap or gaming worlds like Illuvium.
LABS
Comparisons
Blast API vs Infura: Low-Latency & Gaming Focus
A technical comparison of Blast API and Infura for CTOs and architects building latency-sensitive applications like Web3 games and trading platforms. We analyze core architecture, performance benchmarks, and cost structures to determine the optimal provider for real-time data needs.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Low-Latency Imperative
A head-to-head comparison of Blast API and Infura for applications where every millisecond counts.
Infura takes a different approach by prioritizing enterprise-grade reliability, extensive multi-chain support, and a mature feature set. This results in a trade-off where absolute latency may be higher, but developers gain access to robust infrastructure, advanced tools like the Transaction Relay API, and seamless support for over 15 networks including Polygon, Arbitrum, and Optimism. Infura's 99.9%+ SLA and deep integration with the ConsenSys stack (MetaMask, Truffle) make it the default choice for projects requiring stability and breadth over raw speed.
The key trade-off: If your priority is microsecond-level latency for a core set of EVM chains to power a high-performance game or DEX aggregator, choose Blast API. If you prioritize rock-solid reliability, a vast multi-chain ecosystem, and advanced developer tooling for a production-grade application, choose Infura.
tldr-summary
Blast API vs Infura
TL;DR: Key Differentiators at a Glance
A data-driven comparison of two leading RPC providers, focusing on performance, cost, and ecosystem fit for high-throughput applications.
01
Blast API: Ultra-Low Latency
Architected for speed: Optimized global node network with < 50ms p95 latency for gaming and trading apps. This matters for real-time state updates in Web3 games like Illuvium or high-frequency DeFi protocols.
< 50ms
p95 Latency
02
Blast API: Gaming & Social Focus
Native tooling for specific verticals: Offers specialized APIs for NFT metadata, token balances, and transaction simulation critical for gaming and social dApps. Integrates seamlessly with engines like Unity via SDKs.
03
Infura: Unmatched Ecosystem Breadth
Industry standard for general development: Supports 15+ chains (Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum, etc.) with robust, battle-tested infrastructure. This matters for multi-chain protocols or teams requiring a single provider for diverse EVM ecosystems.
15+
Supported Chains
04
Infura: Enterprise Reliability & Support
Consensus Inc. backing and SLAs: Offers formal Service Level Agreements (SLAs) with 99.9%+ uptime and dedicated enterprise support. This is critical for institutional applications in DeFi (e.g., Aave, Compound) where downtime equals financial risk.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Blast API vs Infura: Feature Matrix for Gaming
Direct comparison of key performance, cost, and gaming-specific features.
| Metric / Feature | Blast API | Infura |
|---|---|---|
Avg. Latency (P95) | < 50 ms | 200-500 ms |
Real-World TPS (Ethereum) | N/A (RPC Proxy) | ~4,000 |
Transaction Cost (Ethereum Mainnet) | $0.001 - $0.01 | $0.50 - $2.00 |
Dedicated Gaming RPC | ||
Free Tier Daily Requests | 25M | 100K |
WebSocket Connection Limit | Unlimited | 5 per Project |
Global Edge Network POPs | 50+ | 15+ |
BLAST API VS INFURA
Performance Benchards: Latency & Reliability
Direct comparison of key performance metrics for low-latency applications like gaming and DeFi.
| Metric | Blast API | Infura |
|---|---|---|
P99 Latency (Global) | < 50 ms | 200-500 ms |
Guaranteed Uptime SLA | 99.99% | 99.9% |
Dedicated Gaming RPC | ||
Real-Time Data Streaming | ||
Avg. Block Propagation Time | < 100 ms | ~300 ms |
Global Edge Network Nodes | 40+ | 15+ |
Free Tier Rate Limit | 25 CUs/sec | 100k req/day |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
Blast API vs Infura: Low-Latency & Gaming Focus
A data-driven comparison of specialized gaming infrastructure versus the established general-purpose leader. Key strengths and trade-offs for CTOs evaluating high-performance RPC providers.
01
Blast API: Gaming-Optimized Performance
Sub-100ms global latency: Engineered specifically for real-time gaming and DeFi applications. This matters for on-chain games and high-frequency trading bots where every millisecond impacts user experience and profitability.
< 100ms
Global Latency
02
Blast API: Native Gaming SDKs
Built-in tooling for game devs: Offers Unity and Unreal Engine SDKs, simplifying wallet integration and transaction management. This matters for traditional game studios entering Web3, reducing development time versus building custom RPC integrations.
03
Infura: Unmatched Chain Coverage
Access to 15+ major networks: Single API endpoint for Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum, Optimism, and more. This matters for multi-chain protocols and enterprise applications that require a unified interface across diverse ecosystems without managing multiple providers.
15+
Supported Chains
04
Infura: Enterprise-Grade Reliability
99.9%+ historical uptime backed by Consensys. Offers dedicated nodes, advanced analytics, and priority support. This matters for mission-critical DeFi protocols and NFT marketplaces where downtime directly translates to lost revenue and user trust.
05
Blast API: Higher Cost for Peak Performance
Tiered pricing can be expensive at scale. While competitive for moderate usage, sustained high-throughput gaming traffic may incur significant costs compared to bulk enterprise deals from larger providers. This matters for massively multiplayer games with unpredictable, spiky load.
06
Infura: Potential Latency for Real-Time Apps
General-purpose architecture may not match specialized gaming RPCs. While robust, its global latency is optimized for broad reliability over ultra-low-latency niches. This matters for competitive real-time gaming or high-frequency arbitrage where sub-100ms is a hard requirement.
pros-cons-b
Blast API vs Infura: Low-Latency & Gaming Focus
Infura: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for high-performance dApp development at a glance.
01
Blast API: Latency & Throughput
Sub-100ms global latency with a globally distributed edge network. 99.9%+ uptime SLA and support for 1,000+ RPC requests per second per endpoint. This matters for real-time gaming, high-frequency DeFi arbitrage, and live NFT minting events where speed is critical.
< 100ms
Global Latency
99.9%
Uptime SLA
02
Blast API: Gaming & Web3 Focus
Native WebSocket support for live state updates and dedicated gaming SDKs (e.g., for Unity/Unreal). Features like transaction simulation and real-time event streaming are built-in. This matters for game studios and social dApps needing seamless, persistent connections and instant feedback loops.
03
Infura: Breadth & Ecosystem
Multi-chain support for 15+ networks (Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum, etc.) from a single dashboard. Deep integration with MetaMask, Truffle, and Hardhat. This matters for enterprise teams and generalist protocols managing deployments across multiple ecosystems who value established tooling.
15+
Supported Chains
04
Infura: Enterprise Reliability
Proven infrastructure handling billions of requests daily since 2017. Offers dedicated endpoints, advanced analytics, and team management features. This matters for large institutions, custodians, and public goods where battle-tested stability and granular access controls are non-negotiable.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
Blast API for Gaming
Verdict: The Clear Choice for High-Performance Gaming. Strengths: Built on a high-throughput L2 with native yield, Blast delivers the sub-2 second block times and ultra-low fees (<$0.01) required for real-time, on-chain game state updates and microtransactions. Its dedicated gaming RPC endpoints are optimized for low-latency data streaming, crucial for live leaderboards and in-game asset minting. Native integration with Blast's native yield can be leveraged for in-game economies.
Infura for Gaming
Verdict: A Reliable but Higher-Latency Fallback. Strengths: Infura provides robust, enterprise-grade reliability and supports a vast ecosystem of tools (like The Graph for indexing). However, its performance is gated by the underlying chain (e.g., Ethereum mainnet's ~12-second blocks). For gaming, this often results in higher perceived latency and gas fees, making it less ideal for fast-paced interactions unless deployed on a supported L2 like Arbitrum or Optimism via Infura's suite.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Recommendation
A clear breakdown of the Blast API vs. Infura decision for high-performance, low-latency applications.
Blast API excels at ultra-low latency and predictable performance for gaming and DeFi because it is a specialized, dedicated RPC service built on a globally distributed network. For example, it consistently achieves sub-100ms response times for EVM chains like Polygon and Arbitrum, which is critical for real-time state updates in on-chain games like Pixels or high-frequency DEX arbitrage. Its architecture prioritizes request speed and reliability over a vast multi-chain offering.
Infura takes a different approach by providing a comprehensive, enterprise-grade suite for broad Web3 development. This results in a trade-off: while its general-purpose infrastructure offers exceptional reliability (99.9%+ SLA) and supports over 15+ chains including Ethereum, IPFS, and Starknet, its latency can be less predictable under peak load compared to a specialized provider. Its strength is in being a one-stop shop for prototyping and scaling diverse applications.
The key trade-off: If your priority is raw speed and consistent sub-second latency for a specific EVM chain (e.g., building a competitive gaming dApp on Arbitrum), choose Blast API. If you prioritize breadth, enterprise support, and a managed service for a multi-chain portfolio where latency is important but not the sole defining metric, choose Infura. For a CTO with a $500K+ budget, the decision hinges on whether to optimize for a single, critical performance vector or for overall development velocity and infrastructure consolidation.
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall