Layer 1s: Ethereum vs Solana vs Avalanche

• Ethereum (PoS, EVM-first): Deepest liquidity & ecosystem; scales via L2 rollups.
• Solana (PoH + PoS, parallel runtime): High throughput, single global state, fast finality.
• Avalanche (Snow consensus, subnets): Customizable app chains with fast finality.

1) Ethereum (EVM & Rollups)

What it is: A Proof-of-Stake (PoS) network where validators stake ETH to propose/attest blocks. Ethereum popularized the rollup-centric roadmap: keep Layer 1 minimal and secure (data + settlement), and push most execution to Layer 2s (optimistic and ZK rollups) for scale.

• Consensus: Validators are randomly selected to propose blocks and form committees to attest to them. Economic penalties (slashing) discourage equivocation and downtime.
• Programming model: The Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) runs smart contracts written mainly in Solidity or Vyper. Tooling (Hardhat/Foundry), libraries (OpenZeppelin), and audits are mature.
• Scaling approach: Rollups batch transactions and post data/proofs to Ethereum. L1 acts as the court of record; L2s handle cheap execution. Data availability on L1 means anyone can reconstruct state if an L2 operator fails.
• Composability: Enormous DeFi/network effects live here. Liquidity depth and infra (oracles, custody, analytics) are the most developed.

Developer notes: If you want the broadest set of libraries, audits, examples, and wallets, EVM on Ethereum is the default. When you outgrow L1 fees/latency, deploy on a rollup while keeping settlement on Ethereum.

Operational tradeoffs: Gas can be higher during demand spikes; final settlement is gated by inclusion on L1; bridging between L2s or to other ecosystems introduces UX considerations.

2) Solana (PoH + PoS, Parallel Runtime)

What it is: A high-throughput, monolithic L1 that keeps execution, data availability, and consensus in one system. It combines Proof of History (PoH)—a verifiable global clock for transaction ordering with PoS finality.

• Runtime & parallelism: The Sealevel runtime executes transactions in parallel when they touch disjoint accounts. Programs declare the accounts they will read/write up front, enabling concurrency.
• Programming model: Smart contracts (“programs”) are typically written in Rust (often via the Anchor framework). State lives in accounts rather than contract storage mappings; SPL is the token standard.
• Throughput & UX: Single global state with fast confirmation and low fees creates a “real-time app” feel (trading, social, gaming). Local fee markets help isolate congestion.
• Validator requirements: Higher hardware and bandwidth expectations reflect the throughput goals; this raises the bar for running full nodes.

Developer notes: Expect a different ergonomics vs. Solidity: explicit account handling, rent/lamports considerations, and a Rust toolchain. The payoff is performance and new design patterns (shared order books, real-time games).

3) Avalanche (Snow & Subnets)

What it is: A family of chains powered by the Avalanche Snow consensus (repeated randomized sampling leading to rapid probabilistic finality) and a design that encourages app-specific subnets.

• Built-in chains: Notably the C-Chain (EVM-compatible) where most smart-contract activity lives, alongside other chains for assets/coordination.
• Subnets: Customizable networks where validators opt in. Projects can choose their own virtual machine (EVM or custom), fee token, and rules, useful for compliance zones, gaming shards, or enterprise deployments.
• Consensus characteristics: Low-latency finality with high throughput via gossip-based repeated sampling. No need for massive committees; metastability yields quick decisions.
• Dev UX: If you know EVM, you can launch on the C-Chain or spin up an EVM subnet with your own parameters. For special needs, build a custom VM.

Operational tradeoffs: Subnets add sovereignty (you choose validators/rules) but shift some security/ops burden to the subnet. Interoperability and bridging between subnets/L1s require careful design.

4) Key Comparisons

Recap

• Ethereum: Anchors security & liquidity; scales via rollups. Best library/audit depth and cross-protocol composability.
• Solana: Pursues high throughput on a single chain with a parallel runtime and low fees, great UX for real-time apps.
• Avalanche: Lets you spin up fast, sovereign subnets for custom requirements, while the C-Chain provides an EVM home base.

In practice, large projects often mix these: settle critical value on Ethereum (sometimes via an L2), run latency-sensitive front ends on Solana, or launch specialized subnets on Avalanche for dedicated experiences or regulatory boundaries.

Quick check

1. Which L1 leans on L2s for scaling?
2. Which L1 uses Proof of History?
3. What does an Avalanche subnet provide?

Go deeper

• Ethereum Dev Docs
• Solana Dev Portal
• Avalanche Docs

Next, see how Layer 2s scale Ethereum with different proof systems.

Next: Optimistic Rollups →