This document describes the setup, execution, and benchmark results of the Arkanoid Simulation across different platforms: Ethereum, Arbitrum EVM, Arbitrum Nitro, and Gear.exe. The simulation tests high-load computations to measure cost, speed, and scalability on each network.
| Platform | Instances | Total Gas Used | Blocks Used | Cost (USD) | Contract/Transaction Link |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ethereum | 1 | 789,113,326 | 26 | $27,491 | Contract / Transactions |
| Arbitrum EVM | 1 | 789,113,326 | 26 | ~$200 | Transaction / Contract |
| Arbitrum Nitro | 1 | 85,164,788 | 4 | $4 | Contract |
| Gear.exe | 16 (parallel) | 1.7T internal Gear gas | 1 | $0.17 | Transaction |
-
Ethereum:
- Purpose: Provides a baseline for comparison. Running high-load simulations like Arkanoid on Ethereum highlights the expense and limitations due to high gas fees.
-
Arbitrum EVM:
- Setup: The simulation ran on Arbitrum’s standard EVM with similar gas consumption to Ethereum. However, transaction costs are lower due to reduced gas prices.
-
Arbitrum Nitro:
- Setup: Allows larger transaction capacity with up to 1,000 iterations per block. Provides a cost-efficient solution compared to Ethereum but still involves multiple transactions for high-load processes.
-
Gear.exe:
- Key Advantage: Gear.exe allowed us to run 16 simultaneous Arkanoid simulations, all of which fit within a single block. Each simulation involved high-load calculations, and Gear.exe’s architecture enabled these processes to complete without interruptions or additional messages.
This comparison illustrates that Gear.exe offers unparalleled efficiency by fitting multiple high-load simulations into a single block at minimal cost.