Compare consensus resources by the scarce-resource values in Compare Profiles. Reputation designs admit participants instead of charging a resource, so the questions are who admits them, what their infrastructure costs and what holds them accountable. Stake designs tie up bonded capital and require validators to stay online for their duties. Work designs make repeated hashing part of leader selection, which consumes hardware and electricity. Designs recorded as other are compared on their own resource. Each design has hardware, operational, incentive, and concentration questions that should be measured separately.
Key idea. Compare the whole operating lifecycle: preparation, steady operation, replacement, and verification.
Example
For any design, account separately for preparation (such as acquiring hardware or bonding stake), steady operation, replacement and verification. Do not treat an efficient proof check as an estimate of the entire network's energy use.
Keep in mind
- No live energy, emissions, cost, or profitability figures are supplied by this card.
- A precise comparison needs a date, system boundary, energy mix, hardware assumptions, and comparable methodology.
- Resource efficiency alone does not establish decentralization or eliminate electronic waste.
Sources
- Bitcoin proof of work (external site)
- Ethereum proof of stake (external site)
- XRP Ledger documentation: Unique Node List (UNL) (external site)