Vitalik Buterin recently addressed the frequently debated question of “Solana vs. Ethereum,” asserting that Solana’s Proof of Stake (PoS) system is significantly more centralized compared to Ethereum.
In a recent interview, Ethereum Co-founder Vitalik Buterin explained that running a Solana node is notably more complex than operating an Ethereum node, and Solana’s PoS model is more centralized. Additionally, many community initiatives on Solana are directly ed by the Solana Foundation.
Vitalik stated, “They [Solana] focus heavily on applications and like to talk about DePIN, which they are developing in collaboration with large companies to sell hardware and work with telecom companies to create a new internet. These applications have a characteristic of having a much lower demand for decentralization than Ethereum.”
He added that for blockchains ing 100 transactions per second (TPS), Ethereum’s Layer 1 (L1) can’t meet this demand, leaving two options: switch to a high-performance blockchain or use Ethereum Layer 2 (L2) solutions, such as Arbitrum, Base, or MegaETH.
Explaining what sets Ethereum apart from faster chains, Vitalik highlighted that Ethereum offers a long-term commitment to decentralization, neutrality, and security.
“You can look at some data charts comparing the decentralization of Ethereum’s PoS mining pools with Bitcoin’s mining pools, and you will find that Ethereum is more decentralized than Bitcoin,” Buterin asserted.
The 30-year-old co-founder itted that Ethereum also has a track record of addressing centralization challenges. For example, three years ago, Ethereum’s network heavily relied on Geth and Prysm clients, but now no single client holds more than 52% of the network share.
Buterin cited another example of Ethereum’s improvement in centralization challenges—the Tornado Cash controversy: when certain crypto transactions were banned, many feared Ethereum might lose its neutrality. However, over the past two years, the percentage of blocks censoring these transactions has dropped from over 80% to between 20% and 50%.
Lastly, Buterin conceded that Ethereum L1 may not be ideal for high-performance applications, like gaming, “which is why Ethereum relies on L2,” he reasoned. This design allows L1 to focus on being a decentralized, neutral, and secure base layer( similar to Bitcoin) while L2 handles transaction speed and efficiency, providing a smooth experience for mainstream s.
Buterin also mentioned the success of Polymarket, saying that he had been interested in market prediction platforms for a long time and had a poor experience with one of the earliest prediction market platforms—Augur, particularly due to its high transaction fees. Vitalik credits Polymarket’s popularity to “lower transaction fees and faster transaction confirmation speeds.”
