StarkEx excels at providing high-throughput, low-cost scaling for single, complex applications. It's a dedicated validium or rollup engine that allows dApps like dYdX (perpetuals) and Immutable X (NFTs) to achieve over 9,000 TPS for orderbook trades and mint millions of NFTs with near-zero fees. Its architecture is optimized for a single business logic, enabling deep customization and predictable performance.
LABS
Comparisons
StarkNet vs StarkEx: L2 Models
A technical comparison of StarkWare's two ZK-Rollup models: the application-specific StarkEx and the general-purpose StarkNet. Analysis for CTOs and architects on architecture, cost, performance, and ecosystem trade-offs.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: Two StarkWare Architectures
A technical breakdown of StarkNet's general-purpose rollup versus StarkEx's application-specific scaling engine.
StarkNet takes a different approach as a permissionless, general-purpose ZK-Rollup. This results in a trade-off: while it offers a composable, Ethereum-like environment for deploying any smart contract (written in Cairo), its current performance is shared across all applications. Its TVL and developer activity are growing, but per-transaction costs and throughput are more variable compared to a dedicated StarkEx instance.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing performance and cost-efficiency for a single, high-volume application (e.g., a gaming economy or a derivatives DEX), choose StarkEx. If you prioritize permissionless innovation, smart contract composability, and building within a broader ecosystem, choose StarkNet.
tldr-summary
StarkEx vs StarkNet: L2 Models
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
Key architectural and operational trade-offs at a glance. StarkEx is a SaaS framework for custom scaling, while StarkNet is a permissionless general-purpose ZK-Rollup.
01
StarkEx: Custom App-Specific Scaling
SaaS Framework: Deploy a dedicated, high-throughput validity rollup for a single application (dYdX, ImmutableX, Sorare). This matters for trading platforms and NFT marketplaces requiring deterministic performance and custom data availability models (Validium/Volition).
900M+
Trades Processed
< 1 sec
Proof Generation
03
StarkNet: Permissionless Smart Contract Platform
General-Purpose L2: A decentralized network where anyone can deploy Cairo smart contracts (ERC-20, DeFi protocols like zkLend, NFT projects). This matters for developers building novel, composable dApps that require a shared state and liquidity layer, similar to Ethereum L1 but with ZK scalability.
200+
Projects Deployed
L2 SCALING MODELS
Feature Comparison: StarkEx vs StarkNet
Direct comparison of the application-specific (StarkEx) and general-purpose (StarkNet) ZK-Rollup models.
| Metric / Feature | StarkEx | StarkNet |
|---|---|---|
Architecture Model | Application-Specific Rollup | General-Purpose Rollup |
Development Model | Managed SaaS | Permissionless Smart Contracts |
Time to Finality (L1) | ~12 hours | ~3-5 hours |
Transaction Cost (Typical) | $0.001 - $0.01 | $0.05 - $0.20 |
Throughput (Peak TPS) | 9,000+ (dYdX) | 100+ |
Proven Apps/Protocols | dYdX, Sorare, Immutable | JediSwap, zkLend, Nostra |
Native Account Abstraction |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
StarkEx vs StarkEx: L2 Models
Key architectural and operational trade-offs between the application-specific StarkEx and the general-purpose StarkNet.
01
StarkEx: Custom Performance
Application-specific scaling: Dedicated validity proofs for a single dApp. This enables hyper-optimized TPS (e.g., dYdX achieved 90+ TPS) and sub-second finality for its specific use case. This matters for exchanges and gaming apps needing deterministic, high-frequency performance.
02
StarkEx: Cost Control & Predictability
Fixed operational cost model: The dApp team bears the full cost of STARK proofs and data availability, leading to predictable, volume-based fees. This matters for businesses with stable transaction patterns and dedicated budgets, allowing precise unit economics (e.g., Immutable X for NFTs).
03
StarkEx: Limited Composability
Siloed application state: dApps on StarkEx cannot natively interact with each other or with DeFi protocols on the same chain. This matters for developers building complex, interconnected ecosystems that require cross-application liquidity or shared state.
04
StarkEx: Higher Operational Overhead
Self-managed infrastructure: Teams must run their own sequencer, manage upgrades, and handle data availability. This matters for projects lacking dedicated DevOps resources, as it introduces complexity compared to the shared network model of StarkNet.
05
StarkNet: Native Composability
Unified state across dApps: All contracts on StarkNet share the same L2 state, enabling seamless interoperability (e.g., lending protocol using an NFT as collateral). This matters for DeFi legos and social apps where network effects are critical.
06
StarkNet: Developer Ecosystem
Vibrant tooling and standards: Access to a broad ecosystem with Cairo tooling, account abstraction (Argent, Braavos), and shared liquidity (Ekubo, JediSwap). This matters for teams who want to build quickly using existing primitives and tap into a larger user base.
07
StarkNet: Variable Network Costs
Shared, volatile fee market: Transaction fees fluctuate based on overall network demand and STRK gas prices, similar to Ethereum L1. This matters for applications requiring stable, predictable per-transaction costs for end-users.
08
StarkNet: Congestion Risk
Contention for shared resources: High activity in one dApp (e.g., an airdrop) can increase latency and costs for all others on the network. This matters for applications needing guaranteed performance SLAs independent of other network activity.
pros-cons-b
PROS AND CONS
StarkNet vs StarkEx: L2 Models
Key architectural and operational trade-offs between the general-purpose zkRollup and its application-specific counterpart.
01
StarkNet: General-Purpose Flexibility
Full composability for dApps: A permissionless, Turing-complete L2 where any developer can deploy smart contracts (Cairo). This enables novel DeFi protocols like zkLend and Nostra to interact seamlessly. Essential for building interconnected ecosystems.
02
StarkNet: Native Token & Decentralization Path
STRK token for governance and fees: Uses a dedicated token for transaction fees and sequencer/prover incentives, aligning with a long-term decentralized validator set. Critical for protocols prioritizing credibly neutral infrastructure.
03
StarkEx: Enterprise-Grade Throughput
Proven scalability for specific apps: Processes 9K+ TPS in production for applications like dYdX (perpetuals) and ImmutableX (NFTs). Offers dedicated throughput and customizable data availability modes (Validium, Rollup). Best for high-frequency trading or massive NFT drops.
04
StarkEx: Predictable Cost & Performance
Fixed fee model and instant finality: Applications negotiate a fixed cost per proof with StarkWare, providing predictable operational expenses. Offers instant withdrawal confirmations via validity proofs. Ideal for businesses requiring stable unit economics.
05
StarkNet: Evolving Performance & Cost
Variable fees and proving times: Transaction costs and finality times fluctuate with network demand and prover market dynamics. While Cairo-VM improvements (e.g., Sierra) reduce costs, it's less predictable than a dedicated SaaS model. A trade-off for open access.
06
StarkEx: Limited Composability
Application-specific silos: Each deployment (e.g., Sorare, rhino.fi) is a separate validity chain. Assets and logic cannot natively interact between different StarkEx instances. A constraint for developers seeking cross-protocol liquidity.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
StarkEx for App Developers
Verdict: Choose for a dedicated, high-performance application. Strengths: StarkEx is an application-specific L2. It provides a dedicated validity rollup for a single dApp or a small, curated set (e.g., dYdX, Sorare, ImmutableX). This model offers:
- Custom Data Availability (DA): Choose between ZK-Rollup (full security) or Validium (lower fees, off-chain data) per your app's needs.
- Predictable Performance: No shared execution environment means no network congestion from other protocols. Your TPS and latency are consistent.
- Tailored Tooling: SDKs and support are optimized for your specific use case (e.g., trading, gaming).
StarkNet for App Developers
Verdict: Choose for a composable, general-purpose ecosystem. Strengths: StarkNet is a general-purpose ZK-Rollup, akin to a decentralized L2 blockchain.
- Native Composability: Smart contracts can interact seamlessly, enabling complex DeFi lego and on-chain gaming economies.
- Developer Ecosystem: Access to Cairo language, StarkNet OS, and a growing suite of tools (e.g., Argent X wallet, Voyager explorer).
- Permissionless Innovation: Anyone can deploy a contract, fostering a rich, interconnected application layer.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Verdict and Final Recommendation
Choosing between StarkNet and StarkEx is a fundamental decision between a general-purpose ecosystem and a bespoke, high-performance application.
StarkEx excels at providing dedicated, high-throughput scaling for single, complex applications because it operates as a SaaS framework where each dApp gets its own optimized, application-specific rollup. For example, dYdX leveraged StarkEx to achieve over 2,000 TPS for its perpetuals exchange and processed over $1 trillion in cumulative volume before migrating, demonstrating its capacity for market-leading performance in a controlled environment.
StarkNet takes a different approach by being a permissionless, general-purpose Validity Rollup. This results in a trade-off: while it offers composability and a shared ecosystem for DeFi, gaming, and social apps (boasting a TVL often exceeding $100M), its performance is shared across all network activity. This can lead to variable transaction fees and network congestion during peak demand, unlike the predictable, app-isolated environment of StarkEx.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing performance and cost-efficiency for a single, high-value application (like a CEX-grade DEX, NFT marketplace, or complex game), choose StarkEx. If you prioritize building within a composable, permissionless L2 ecosystem where your protocol can interact with others like Ekubo (AMM) and Nostra (money market), choose StarkNet.
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