StarkEx excels at providing high-performance, application-specific scaling with predictable costs and operational control. It is a SaaS-based validity rollup that offers dedicated throughput for a single dApp, achieving over 9,000 TPS in production for applications like dYdX and Immutable X. This model provides teams with a managed service, a clear fee structure, and a faster path to production, but it is a closed system limited to the application it serves.
LABS
Comparisons
StarkEx vs StarkNet
A technical analysis comparing StarkWare's two primary offerings: StarkEx, a SaaS-based validity proof engine for specific applications, and StarkNet, a permissionless, general-purpose ZK-Rollup network. This guide provides CTOs and architects with the data to choose the right infrastructure for their project's scale, control, and ecosystem needs.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: Two Paths to Scalability
StarkEx and StarkNet represent two distinct architectural philosophies within the StarkWare ecosystem for scaling Ethereum.
StarkNet takes a different approach by being a permissionless, decentralized L2 Validity Rollup. It functions as a general-purpose smart contract platform, akin to an L1, where any developer can deploy their own Cairo contracts. This results in a trade-off: while it enables permissionless innovation and composability between protocols (like Aave and Nostra), it introduces shared network effects and potential congestion, with current performance metrics like TPS being a function of overall network activity rather than a dedicated guarantee.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing throughput for a single, high-volume application with predictable economics and minimal operational overhead, choose StarkEx. If you prioritize building in a permissionless, composable ecosystem where your protocol can interact natively with others, accepting shared network dynamics, choose StarkNet.
tldr-summary
StarkEx vs StarkNet
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for enterprise architects.
01
StarkEx: For App-Specific Performance
Tailored, high-throughput scaling: Dedicated validity rollup for a single dApp (e.g., dYdX, Immutable X). Achieves 9,000+ TPS for spot trading and < 1 ms latency for NFT minting. This matters for centralized-exchange-grade performance where you need predictable, isolated capacity.
9,000+ TPS
Peak Throughput
< 1 ms
Minting Latency
02
StarkEx: Sovereign Data & Custom Logic
Full control over data availability (DA): Choose between Validium (off-chain DA) for lowest fees or ZK-Rollup (on-chain DA) for maximum security. You can implement custom business logic (e.g., complex order types) without permission. This matters for regulated or high-volume financial applications needing compliance or unique features.
03
StarkNet: For Composability & Ecosystem
General-purpose, permissionless L2: A decentralized network where any developer can deploy smart contracts using Cairo. Enables native composability between protocols like JediSwap (DEX) and Nostra (lending). This matters for building novel DeFi primitives, social apps, or gaming economies that require interoperability.
$1.3B+
TVL
04
StarkNet: Developer Experience & Future-Proofing
Unified Cairo toolchain and account abstraction: Write once in Cairo for both L2 and L3. Native account abstraction (AA) enables gasless transactions and social recovery via Braavos & Argent wallets. This matters for teams building for the long-term Starknet ecosystem who want to leverage shared security and cutting-edge UX.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
StarkEx vs StarkNet: Key Technical Comparison
Direct comparison of key metrics and features for StarkWare's two scaling solutions.
| Metric | StarkEx | StarkNet |
|---|---|---|
Architecture | Application-Specific Validity Rollup | General-Purpose Validity Rollup |
Transaction Throughput (TPS) | 9,000+ | 100-300 |
Avg. Transaction Cost | $0.001 - $0.01 | $0.05 - $0.20 |
Time to Finality (L1) | ~12 hours | ~3-5 hours |
Developer Model | SaaS / Managed Service | Permissionless Smart Contracts |
Native Account Abstraction | ||
Primary Use Cases | dYdX, Sorare, Immutable X | DeFi, Gaming, NFTs |
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
StarkEx vs StarkNet: Performance and Cost Benchmarks
Direct comparison of key technical and economic metrics for StarkWare's L2 scaling solutions.
| Metric | StarkEx (App-Specific) | StarkNet (General-Purpose) |
|---|---|---|
Architecture | Application-Specific Validity Rollup | General-Purpose ZK-Rollup |
Peak TPS (Proven) | 9,000+ (dYdX) | 65+ (Mainnet) |
Avg. Transaction Cost (ETH Transfer) | $0.10 - $0.50 | $0.01 - $0.10 |
Time to Finality (L1 Confirmation) | ~12 hours | ~12 hours |
Prover Time (State Update) | < 10 minutes | ~30-60 minutes |
Native Account Abstraction | ||
Primary Use Cases | dYdX, Immutable X, Sorare | DeFi, Gaming, Social dApps |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
StarkEx vs StarkNet: Key Trade-offs
A technical breakdown of StarkWare's two scaling solutions, highlighting their architectural differences and ideal use cases.
01
StarkEx: Pros
App-Specific Performance: Dedicated validity rollup for a single dApp (e.g., dYdX, ImmutableX). Achieves 9,000+ TPS and sub-second finality for its specific application logic. This matters for centralized-exchange-grade performance in DeFi or gaming.
9K+ TPS
Peak Throughput
< 1 sec
Finality
02
StarkEx: Cons
Limited Composability: Operates as a siloed application chain. Assets and logic cannot natively interact with other StarkEx instances or dApps on StarkNet without complex bridging. This matters if you require cross-protocol DeFi integrations or a unified ecosystem.
03
StarkNet: Pros
General-Purpose Composability: A decentralized L2 ZK-Rollup supporting arbitrary smart contracts (Cairo). Enables native composability between dApps like JediSwap, Nostra, and Ekubo. This matters for building complex, interconnected protocols and fostering a developer ecosystem.
100+ TPS
Network Capacity
04
StarkNet: Cons
Network Congestion & Cost: Shared network resources mean performance and fees are subject to overall demand. Prover costs and L1 settlement fees can make small transactions expensive compared to a tailored StarkEx chain. This matters for high-frequency micro-transactions or applications requiring guaranteed low, predictable costs.
pros-cons-b
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance.
StarkEx vs StarkNet: Pros and Cons
A technical breakdown of StarkWare's two scaling solutions. StarkEx is a SaaS framework for custom app-chains, while StarkNet is a permissionless, general-purpose ZK-Rollup.
01
StarkEx: Production-Proven Performance
Specific advantage: Processes 100M+ transactions with sub-1-second finality for dYdX and Sorare. This matters for high-frequency trading (dYdX) and NFT minting events (Immutable X) where user experience is critical.
100M+
Total TXs
< 1 sec
Finality
03
StarkNet: Permissionless Composability
Specific advantage: A single, shared L2 with 100+ live dApps (e.g., JediSwap, Nostra). This matters for DeFi protocols needing native interoperability and network effects without managing a dedicated chain.
100+
Live dApps
05
StarkEx: Limited to Approved Logic
Specific trade-off: Each instance runs a specific, StarkWare-audited application (e.g., only spot trading). This is a constraint for rapidly iterating startups that need to deploy new smart contract features weekly.
06
StarkNet: Higher & Volatile Fees
Specific trade-off: As a shared network, fees spike during congestion (e.g., NFT mints), currently higher than optimized StarkEx chains. This is a problem for high-volume, low-margin businesses requiring stable cost projections.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Use Which
StarkEx for DeFi
Verdict: The default choice for established, high-volume applications. Strengths:
- Proven Scale: Handles 9K+ TPS for dYdX and Immutable X, with billions in TVL.
- Customizability: App-specific validity proofs and data availability modes (ZK-Rollup vs Validium) let you optimize for cost (Validium) or Ethereum-level security (Rollup).
- Battle-Tested: Production-ready with mature fraud-proof systems and dedicated operator support. Best For: Centralized exchanges moving on-chain (dYdX), high-frequency trading, and large-scale AMMs where custom logic and throughput are critical.
StarkNet for DeFi
Verdict: The ecosystem play for novel, composable applications. Strengths:
- Native Composability: Permissionless smart contracts (Cairo) enable seamless integration between protocols like Ekubo (AMM) and Nostra (lending).
- Innovation Sandbox: Supports account abstraction (Argent X, Braavos) and novel primitives impossible in isolated StarkEx apps.
- Long-Term Vision: Aligns with Ethereum's L2 roadmap for decentralized sequencing and proof generation. Best For: New DeFi primitives, protocols requiring deep composability, and teams building within the broader StarkNet ecosystem.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Recommendation
Choosing between StarkEx and StarkNet is a strategic decision between a specialized, battle-tested engine and a permissionless, composable universe.
StarkEx excels at providing high-throughput, dedicated scaling for single applications because it operates as a SaaS framework with a centralized sequencer. For example, dYdX (v3) achieved over 2,000 TPS with sub-$0.01 fees, and the ecosystem has settled over $1 trillion in cumulative volume. It offers predictable performance, faster time-to-market, and direct support from StarkWare, making it ideal for established enterprises like Immutable and Sorare that need a turnkey, production-ready solution.
StarkNet takes a different approach by being a decentralized, permissionless L2 Validity Rollup. This results in a trade-off: while it enables native composability between apps (like DeFi protocols Ekubo and Nostra) and fosters a permissionless innovation layer, it currently faces higher and more variable transaction fees (often $0.10-$0.50) and lower throughput per application compared to a dedicated StarkEx instance. Its strength is in building an interconnected ecosystem, not optimizing for a single app's peak performance.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximum performance, cost predictability, and a managed service for a specific application, choose StarkEx. It's the proven tool for scaling exchanges, games, and enterprise use cases. If you prioritize permissionless innovation, native composability, and building within a decentralized L2 ecosystem, choose StarkNet. It is the strategic choice for protocols aiming to be a core primitive in a broader, interconnected financial stack.
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