Archive-Enabled RPC excels at providing complete historical data access because it maintains the full blockchain state from genesis. For example, services like Alchemy's Archive Node API or Infura's Archive Add-On enable queries for any transaction, event, or smart contract state at any past block, which is critical for analytics platforms like Dune Analytics, complex DeFi audits, or NFT provenance tracking. This full-state retention, however, requires significant infrastructure, leading to higher operational costs and slower initial sync times compared to non-archive nodes.
LABS
Comparisons
Archive-Enabled RPC vs Non-Archive Node
A technical analysis comparing the data access, performance, and cost of archive-enabled RPC endpoints versus standard full nodes for blockchain developers and architects.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction
A foundational comparison of Archive-Enabled RPC services and Non-Archive Nodes, focusing on their core architectural trade-offs and operational impact.
Non-Archive (or Full) Nodes take a different approach by pruning historical state data to conserve disk space and improve sync performance. This results in a trade-off: they can serve real-time data and recent history (typically the last 128 blocks on Ethereum) with high efficiency and lower cost, making them ideal for wallets like MetaMask, decentralized exchanges for price feeds, and high-frequency dApp interactions. Their limitation is the inability to query arbitrary historical data without relying on a separate archive service.
The key trade-off is between data completeness and cost/performance. If your priority is deep historical analysis, compliance reporting, or building data-intensive applications like block explorers, choose an Archive-Enabled RPC. If you prioritize low-latency interactions, cost-effective scaling for user-facing dApps, or simple balance/transaction queries, a Non-Archive Node is the optimal starting point.
tldr-summary
ARCHIVE-ENABLED RPC VS NON-ARCHIVE NODE
TL;DR Summary
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for CTOs evaluating blockchain data access.
01
Archive Node: Full Historical Access
Complete state history: Enables queries for any account balance, smart contract state, or transaction at any historical block. This is critical for on-chain analytics (Dune Analytics, The Graph), compliance audits, and complex DeFi protocol logic requiring past data.
100%
Historical Coverage
02
Archive Node: Developer Power
Unlocks advanced tooling: Essential for running indexers, block explorers (Etherscan), and services that rely on events and logs from genesis. Supports ERC-20 token history lookups and NFT provenance tracking, which standard nodes cannot provide.
03
Non-Archive Node: Cost & Speed
Lower operational overhead: Requires significantly less storage (~1TB vs 10TB+ for Ethereum) and syncs faster. This matters for high-frequency trading bots, wallet providers, and dApp frontends that only need recent state data and transaction broadcasting.
~1TB
Storage (Ethereum)
04
Non-Archive Node: Simplicity & Scale
Faster deployment and maintenance: Pruned state simplifies node operations. Ideal for load-balanced RPC fleets (like those from Alchemy, Infura) serving simple queries, and for new chains where historical data isn't yet a priority. Enables horizontal scaling at lower cost.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Archive-Enabled RPC vs Non-Archive Node
Direct comparison of key metrics and features for historical data access.
| Metric / Feature | Archive-Enabled RPC | Standard (Non-Archive) Node |
|---|---|---|
Historical Data Access (Block #0) | ||
Typical Query Latency (Historical Tx) | 200-500 ms | N/A |
Storage Requirement (Ethereum) | ~12 TB+ | ~650 GB |
Monthly Infrastructure Cost | $1,500 - $5,000+ | $200 - $800 |
DeFi Analytics (e.g., Uniswap V1) | ||
On-Chain Compliance Audits | ||
SLA for 99.9% Uptime |
INFRASTRUCTURE COST & CAPABILITY COMPARISON
Archive-Enabled RPC vs Non-Archive Node
Direct comparison of performance, cost, and data access for blockchain node types.
| Metric | Archive-Enabled RPC | Non-Archive (Full) Node |
|---|---|---|
Historical Data Access (Block #1) | ||
Storage Requirements | ~12 TB (Ethereum) | ~1 TB (Ethereum) |
Monthly Cloud Cost (Est.) | $1,200 - $3,000+ | $300 - $800 |
Query Latency (Historical) | < 2 seconds | N/A |
Sync Time (Initial) | 2-4 weeks | 3-7 days |
Use Case Fit | Analytics, Indexers, Explorers | Live Transactions, Validators |
pros-cons-a
ARCHIVE NODE VS. NON-ARCHIVE NODE
Pros and Cons: Archive-Enabled RPC
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for infrastructure decisions.
01
Archive Node: Full Historical Access
Complete state history: Access any block, transaction, or contract state from genesis. This is critical for on-chain analytics (e.g., Dune Analytics, Nansen), advanced DeFi queries (e.g., calculating historical APY), and compliance/auditing.
100%
State Coverage
02
Archive Node: Higher Operational Cost
Significant resource overhead: Requires 4-12TB+ of fast SSD storage (vs. ~1TB for full node) and more RAM/CPU. This translates to ~3-5x higher hosting costs on providers like Alchemy, QuickNode, or self-hosted infrastructure.
03
Non-Archive Node: Cost-Effective & Fast
Optimized for current state: Processes only the last 128+ blocks on Ethereum. Enables lower latency for common RPC calls (eth_getBalance, eth_sendRawTransaction) and ~70% lower infrastructure costs. Ideal for wallets (MetaMask), exchanges, and most dApp frontends.
~70%
Cost Reduction
04
Non-Archive Node: Limited Query Capability
No deep historical data: Cannot serve queries for old blocks (e.g., eth_getLogs from block #1) or historical state (e.g., eth_getStorageAt for past state). This breaks functionality for indexers (The Graph), block explorers (Etherscan), and NFT rarity tools.
pros-cons-b
ARCHIVE-ENABLED RPC VS NON-ARCHIVE NODE
Pros and Cons: Standard Full Node (Non-Archive)
Key strengths and trade-offs for infrastructure decisions. Choose based on your application's historical data requirements versus operational cost and speed.
02
Archive Node: Heavy Resource Burden
Massive storage & cost: Requires ~12+ TB for Ethereum (vs. ~1 TB for a full node), leading to high cloud infrastructure costs (e.g., ~$1,500+/month on AWS). Synchronization can take weeks. This is often prohibitive for teams without dedicated devops, making services like Alchemy's Archive Plan or Infura's Archive Add-on a more practical alternative.
03
Standard Full Node: Lean & Fast Sync
Optimized for current state: Maintains only the most recent state, requiring ~70-90% less storage. Prunes old data, enabling faster synchronization (days vs. weeks). Ideal for validators, dApp backends needing only real-time data, and light client relays. Supports essential JSON-RPC calls (eth_getBalance, eth_call) for the latest block.
04
Standard Full Node: Historical Data Blind Spot
Cannot query old state: Fails on historical calls like eth_getBalance for a block older than the last 128 (Ethereum). This breaks features requiring historical analysis, such as tax reporting tools (TokenTax), NFT provenance tracking, or smart contracts that verify past states (e.g., Optimism's fraud proofs). You must rely on external archive services.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
When to Use Which: A Scenario-Based Guide
Archive-Enabled RPC for Developers
Verdict: Essential for building and debugging. Strengths: Enables querying any historical state, which is critical for developing complex smart contracts, debugging transaction failures, and building analytics dashboards. Tools like Hardhat and Foundry rely on archive data for local testing and forking mainnet. For example, simulating a Uniswap v3 swap from 90 days ago to test a strategy requires an archive node. Key Metric: Access to full state history, not just recent blocks.
Non-Archive Node for Developers
Verdict: Sufficient for basic front-end interactions and live data.
Strengths: Lower operational cost and complexity. Perfect for dApp front-ends that only need to query recent block data, current token balances (via eth_getBalance), or send new transactions. Services like Alchemy's Free Tier or a standard Infura plan handle this for most applications.
Trade-off: You cannot query historical state (e.g., a user's ERC-20 balance at block #15,000,000).
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Decision Framework
A clear breakdown of when to use archive-enabled RPCs versus non-archive nodes, based on your application's data and cost requirements.
Archive-Enabled RPCs (e.g., Alchemy, QuickNode, Chainstack) excel at providing deep historical data access and complex query capabilities because they maintain a complete, indexed record of all blockchain state changes. For example, a DeFi protocol like Aave or Compound requires this to calculate user yields or audit historical positions, which is impossible on a standard node. The trade-off is cost: archive data queries are typically 5-10x more expensive than standard requests, and maintaining this infrastructure requires significant storage (e.g., >10TB for Ethereum).
Non-Archive (Standard) Nodes take a different approach by pruning historical state data, typically keeping only the last 128 blocks of state for Ethereum. This results in dramatically lower operational costs and storage overhead, making them ideal for real-time operations like broadcasting transactions, checking wallet balances, or listening for new events. However, the trade-off is a hard limitation: any query requiring data older than the pruned window will fail, making them unsuitable for analytics, tax reporting, or on-chain forensics.
The key trade-off is between cost/complexity and data depth. If your priority is building a production application with real-time features (wallets, DEX aggregators, NFT mints) where 99% of queries are about the current state, choose a Non-Archive Node. You'll optimize for performance and cost-efficiency. If you prioritize historical data analysis, compliance, or advanced DeFi logic that requires querying arbitrary past states, choose an Archive-Enabled RPC. The premium is justified for applications like The Graph indexers, blockchain explorers, or institutional reporting tools.
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