Sui excels at high-throughput, low-latency applications due to its object-centric data model and parallel execution engine. By processing independent transactions simultaneously, it achieves theoretical peak throughput of 297,000 TPS for simple payments, with sub-second finality. This architecture is ideal for high-frequency DeFi, gaming, and social applications where user experience depends on speed and low cost, as seen in protocols like Cetus and Turbos Finance.
LABS
Comparisons
Sui vs Ethereum: Execution Engines
A technical analysis comparing the execution engines of Sui and Ethereum, focusing on the Move VM versus the EVM. We examine performance, developer experience, cost models, and architectural trade-offs to inform infrastructure decisions for CTOs and protocol architects.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Execution Engine as a Strategic Choice
Choosing between Sui's parallel execution and Ethereum's sequential model is a foundational architectural decision with profound implications for scalability, cost, and developer experience.
Ethereum takes a different approach with its globally ordered, sequential execution model secured by a massive decentralized validator set. This results in stronger synchronization guarantees for complex, interdependent transactions—a trade-off that provides unparalleled security and composability for its $62B TVL ecosystem but limits base-layer throughput to ~15-45 TPS, leading to variable and sometimes high gas fees during congestion.
The key trade-off: If your priority is ultra-scalable performance and predictable low fees for a defined application domain, choose Sui. If you prioritize maximizing security, decentralization, and seamless composability with the broadest existing ecosystem (using tools like Foundry and Hardhat), choose Ethereum, potentially leveraging its L2 rollup roadmap for scale.
tldr-summary
Sui vs Ethereum: Execution Engines
TL;DR: Key Differentiators at a Glance
A data-driven breakdown of the core architectural trade-offs between Sui's Move-based parallel execution and Ethereum's EVM-based sequential execution.
01
Sui: Parallel Execution & Low Latency
Narwhal-Bullshark DAG consensus enables parallel processing of independent transactions. This delivers 120,000+ TPS in controlled benchmarks and sub-second finality for simple payments. This matters for high-frequency DeFi, gaming, and social apps where user experience is critical.
120k+ TPS
Peak Throughput
< 1 sec
Simple Tx Finality
03
Ethereum: Unmatched Ecosystem & Security
$50B+ TVL and 4,000+ monthly active devs (Electric Capital) create a massive network effect. The battle-tested EVM and $30B+ staked securing the beacon chain offer unparalleled security guarantees. This matters for protocols requiring maximum capital security, like Lido, MakerDAO, and Uniswap, or those reliant on existing tooling (MetaMask, Hardhat).
$50B+
Total Value Locked
4k+
Monthly Active Devs
05
Choose Sui For...
- Massively scalable consumer apps needing low, predictable fees.
- Asset-centric logic (games, RWA tokenization) leveraging the object model.
- Teams prioritizing performance and willing to adopt Move over Solidity.
06
Choose Ethereum For...
- Maximum security and decentralization for high-value financial primitives.
- Leveraging existing ecosystem (wallets, oracles, auditors).
- Projects where EVM compatibility and atomic composability are non-negotiable.
SUI VS ETHEREUM
Execution Engine Feature Matrix
Direct comparison of key technical metrics and features for execution engines.
| Metric / Feature | Ethereum (EVM) | Sui (Move VM) |
|---|---|---|
Peak TPS (Sustained) | ~45 | 297,000 |
Avg. Simple Transfer Cost | $0.50 - $5.00 | < $0.001 |
Time to Finality | ~15 min (PoS) | ~400 ms |
Parallel Execution | ||
Consensus Model | Global Ordering | Object-Centric, Narwhal-Bullshark |
Primary Language | Solidity | Move |
Native Asset Type | Account-based | Object-based |
SUI VS ETHEREUM: EXECUTION ENGINES
Performance & Scalability Benchmarks
Direct comparison of throughput, cost, and finality metrics for parallel vs sequential execution.
| Metric | Ethereum (EVM) | Sui (MoveVM) |
|---|---|---|
Peak TPS (Sustained) | ~30 | ~65,000 |
Avg. Transaction Cost (Simple) | $2.50 | < $0.001 |
Time to Finality | ~15 min | < 400 ms |
Execution Model | Sequential | Parallel |
Consensus for Simple Tx | ||
Object-Centric Data Model | ||
Native Support for DeFi Composability |
SUI VS ETHEREUM
Technical Deep Dive: Parallel Execution & State Models
A data-driven comparison of Sui's Move-based parallel execution engine and Ethereum's sequential EVM, analyzing performance, cost, and architectural trade-offs for developers and architects.
Yes, Sui is significantly faster for independent transactions. Sui's parallel execution engine can process over 297,000 TPS in controlled benchmarks for simple payments, while Ethereum's sequential EVM handles ~15-30 TPS. However, Ethereum's speed is constrained by its global consensus model, which prioritizes security and composability for complex DeFi interactions. Sui's speed advantage is most pronounced for applications with high transaction independence, like gaming or mass payments.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which Engine
Ethereum for DeFi
Verdict: The incumbent standard for high-value, composable applications. Strengths: Unmatched Total Value Locked (TVL) ($50B+ ecosystem) and battle-tested security via the EVM. Deep liquidity across DEXs like Uniswap and lending protocols like Aave. Superior composability and integration with a mature tooling stack (Hardhat, Foundry, OpenZeppelin). The Ethereum L2 ecosystem (Arbitrum, Optimism, Base) offers a scalable path while retaining security. Weaknesses: High base-layer gas fees and slower block times (12-15s) can hinder user experience for high-frequency actions.
Sui for DeFi
Verdict: A high-performance contender for novel, latency-sensitive DeFi primitives. Strengths: Sub-second finality and massive throughput (peak 297k TPS) enable real-time trading and liquidations. Lower, predictable fees via the Move language and object-centric model. Native support for parallel execution of unrelated transactions reduces congestion. Ideal for building novel order-book DEXs (e.g., Aftermath Finance) or high-frequency strategies. Weaknesses: Nascent ecosystem with lower TVL, less proven economic security, and emerging composability patterns compared to Ethereum.
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
Sui vs Ethereum: Execution Engines
Key architectural strengths and trade-offs for high-stakes infrastructure decisions.
01
Sui Pro: Parallel Execution & High Throughput
Object-centric model enables parallel processing of independent transactions, achieving 297,000 TPS in controlled benchmarks. This matters for high-frequency DeFi (e.g., Cetus, Turbos) and gaming applications where latency is critical.
297K TPS
Peak Benchmark
02
Sui Pro: Predictable & Low Fees
Single-writer objects and storage fund mechanism decouple gas fees from network congestion, enabling sub-cent simple transfers. This matters for mass-market applications like micropayments and high-volume NFT minting.
03
Ethereum Pro: Battle-Tested Security & Composability
Global atomic composability across a single shared state, secured by a $500B+ ecosystem and thousands of validators. This matters for complex, interdependent DeFi protocols (e.g., Uniswap, Aave, MakerDAO) where synchronous interactions are non-negotiable.
$500B+
Ecosystem TVL
04
Ethereum Pro: Universal Liquidity & Standards
Dominant market position with established standards (ERC-20, ERC-721) and deep, unified liquidity pools. This matters for protocols requiring maximum capital efficiency and broad user/developer adoption from day one.
05
Sui Con: Nascent Ecosystem & Tooling
Younger network with ~$700M TVL and fewer production-tested auditing firms, oracle feeds (Pyth, Switchboard), and wallet integrations compared to Ethereum. This matters for teams needing mature devops and risk management tooling.
~$700M
Current TVL
06
Ethereum Con: Congestion & High Base-Layer Cost
Serial execution and mainnet base fee auction lead to volatile, high fees during demand spikes (>$50 for complex swaps). This matters for applications targeting users with low transaction value or requiring consistent cost predictability.
pros-cons-b
Sui vs Ethereum
Ethereum Execution Engine: Pros and Cons
Key architectural strengths and trade-offs at a glance for CTOs evaluating infrastructure.
01
Sui's Parallel Execution
Massive throughput for independent transactions: Uses the Narwhal & Bullshark DAG-based mempool and the Move language's object model to process non-conflicting transactions in parallel. This enables peak throughputs of 297,000 TPS for simple transfers. This matters for high-frequency DeFi, gaming, and social applications where user actions don't conflict.
297k TPS
Peak Throughput
02
Sui's Object-Centric Data Model
Native asset representation: Assets are first-class objects in Move, enabling direct ownership transfers and eliminating the need for complex ERC-20/ERC-721 wrappers. This reduces smart contract complexity and gas costs for NFT minting/trading and token operations. This matters for projects building dynamic digital asset economies.
03
Ethereum's Security & Composability
Unmatched ecosystem security and network effects: Secured by a $500B+ crypto-economic stake and battle-tested over 9 years. The single-threaded EVM guarantees atomic composability, allowing protocols like Uniswap, Aave, and MakerDAO to interoperate seamlessly within a single block. This matters for DeFi blue-chips and protocols where trustless integration is paramount.
$500B+
Staked Value
04
Ethereum's Developer Maturity
Extensive tooling and standards: Offers the most mature stack with 4,000+ monthly active devs (Electric Capital), established standards (ERC-20, ERC-721, EIP-1559), and robust tooling (Hardhat, Foundry, Ethers.js). The EVM is the de facto standard for multi-chain development. This matters for teams prioritizing development speed, audit availability, and hiring ease.
4k+
Monthly Active Devs
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
Choosing between Sui and Ethereum's execution engines is a strategic decision between raw performance and ecosystem gravity.
Sui excels at high-throughput, low-latency execution for novel applications because of its parallel processing engine and object-centric data model. For example, its Move-based engine has demonstrated peak throughput exceeding 297,000 TPS in controlled environments, with sub-second finality for simple payments. This architecture is ideal for high-frequency DeFi, gaming primitives, and social applications requiring massive scale, as seen in protocols like Cetus and Scallop Lend.
Ethereum takes a different approach by prioritizing security, decentralization, and a massive, composable ecosystem via its single-threaded EVM. This results in the trade-off of higher fees and lower throughput (15-45 TPS on mainnet) but provides unparalleled network effects and a $50B+ DeFi TVL. Its execution is battle-tested across thousands of dApps like Uniswap, Aave, and Lido, with security backed by the world's largest validator set.
The key trade-off: If your priority is building a novel, high-scale application where cost and speed are existential (e.g., a fully on-chain game or a decentralized order book), choose Sui. Its modern engine is built for this. If you prioritize maximum security, deep liquidity, and immediate composability with the broadest set of existing protocols and tools, choose Ethereum or an L2 like Arbitrum or Optimism. The EVM's ecosystem gravity remains its ultimate moat.
ENQUIRY
Build the
future.
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