TON vs. Other Blockchains: Fee Comparison

·

The blockchain landscape has evolved rapidly, with new networks emerging to address scalability, security, and cost challenges. Among them, The Open Network (TON) has gained momentum as a high-performance, low-cost blockchain designed for mass adoption. As developers and users evaluate which platforms to build on or transact with, transaction fees and network scalability have become critical deciding factors.

This article dives into a detailed comparison of TON’s transaction fees against major blockchains—including Ethereum, Solana, Cardano, Binance Smart Chain (BSC), and Polkadot—highlighting how TON stands out in efficiency, speed, and affordability.


Understanding Blockchain Transaction Fees

Before comparing networks, it’s essential to understand what drives transaction fees in blockchain ecosystems.

Every blockchain relies on a decentralized network of nodes to validate and record transactions. These nodes require computational resources, and transaction fees serve as compensation for their work. Several key factors influence fee levels:

Now let’s analyze how leading blockchains stack up—starting with TON.


1. TON (The Open Network)

TON was originally initiated by Telegram and later revitalized by the community. It's engineered for ultra-fast processing, minimal fees, and seamless user experience, making it ideal for everyday payments, DeFi, NFTs, and social applications.

Key Features:

TON’s architecture allows it to maintain low fees even during peak usage. Its efficiency makes it especially attractive for microtransactions and high-frequency dApps.

👉 Discover how fast and affordable blockchain transactions can be on a next-gen network.


2. Ethereum

As the pioneer of smart contracts, Ethereum remains one of the most widely used blockchains for decentralized applications.

Key Features:

Despite upgrades like the Merge and ongoing Layer 2 development (e.g., Optimism, Arbitrum), Ethereum still struggles with high base-layer fees during busy periods. While Layer 2 solutions help, they add complexity for average users.

Pro Tip: For simple transfers or small trades, Ethereum’s fees can outweigh the transaction value—making alternatives like TON more practical.

3. Solana

Solana is known for its blazing speed and rock-bottom fees, powered by a unique combination of Proof-of-History (PoH) and PoS.

Key Features:

Solana delivers impressive performance but has faced criticism over occasional network outages and centralization concerns. Still, it remains a top choice for high-frequency trading and NFT marketplaces.

While Solana’s fees are slightly lower than TON’s in dollar terms, TON offers greater decentralization and censorship resistance—important considerations for long-term sustainability.


4. Cardano

Cardano emphasizes academic rigor, security, and sustainability through its peer-reviewed development process.

Key Features:

Cardano provides reliable security and eco-friendly operations but lags behind in speed and cost-efficiency compared to TON and Solana. Its higher fees and lower throughput limit its appeal for scalable consumer applications.


5. Binance Smart Chain (BSC)

BSC was created to offer a cheaper alternative to Ethereum for DeFi developers and traders.

Key Features:

While BSC offers lower fees than Ethereum, it sacrifices decentralization. With only 21 active validators and strong ties to a centralized exchange, it's less resilient to censorship.

TON not only matches BSC’s fee range but surpasses it in scalability and decentralization—offering a better balance of performance and trustlessness.


6. Polkadot

Polkadot enables interoperability between blockchains via its relay chain and parachain model.

Key Features:

Polkadot’s strength lies in cross-chain communication rather than high-volume transactions. Its high fees and extremely low base-layer throughput make it unsuitable for frequent or low-value transfers.

Compared to TON, Polkadot serves a different niche—focused on infrastructure rather than end-user applications.


Quick Fee & Performance Comparison

BlockchainAvg. FeeScalability (TPS)Consensus Type
TON~$0.01–$0.02MillionsPoS + Sharding
Solana~$0.0002565,000PoH + PoS
Ethereum$1–$50+~13PoS
Binance Smart Chain~$0.10~42PoA
Cardano$0.11–$0.40~12PoS
Polkadot~$0.60~0.05NPoS

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q: Why are TON’s transaction fees so low?
A: TON uses an advanced sharded architecture and efficient Proof-of-Stake consensus that minimizes computational overhead, allowing it to process vast numbers of transactions at minimal cost.

Q: Is low fee the only advantage of TON?
A: No—TON also excels in scalability (millions of TPS), fast finality (~2 seconds), and seamless integration with Telegram-based apps, making it ideal for social and mobile-first use cases.

Q: Can Solana beat TON in transaction cost?
A: Solana has marginally lower nominal fees (~$0.00025), but TON offers superior decentralization, resilience, and ecosystem growth potential—especially in messaging-integrated dApps.

Q: Are high fees always bad?
A: Not necessarily. Higher fees can indicate network demand and security (e.g., Ethereum). However, for mass adoption, consistently high fees hinder usability for small transactions.

Q: Does scalability affect transaction fees?
A: Absolutely. Networks with higher throughput (like TON and Solana) maintain low fees even under load, while congested networks (like Ethereum) see sharp fee spikes.

Q: Is TON safe for large transactions?
A: Yes—TON leverages formal verification, multi-layer security protocols, and decentralized validation to ensure reliability across all transaction sizes.


Why TON Stands Out

When evaluating blockchains based on cost, speed, and scalability, TON emerges as a strong contender for the future of decentralized applications.

Unlike networks that trade decentralization for speed (e.g., BSC) or struggle with congestion (e.g., Ethereum), TON achieves a rare balance:

👉 See what happens when blockchain meets speed, scale, and simplicity.

For developers building scalable dApps or users tired of paying high gas fees, TON presents a compelling alternative.


Final Thoughts

Transaction fees are more than just a cost—they reflect a blockchain’s efficiency, scalability, and user-friendliness. In this regard, TON outperforms most major blockchains by combining negligible fees with industry-leading throughput.

While networks like Solana offer similar speeds and lower nominal fees, TON’s robust architecture, growing ecosystem, and focus on accessibility position it uniquely for global adoption.

As the demand for affordable, fast, and secure blockchain solutions grows, TON is well-poised to lead the next wave of innovation.

👉 Start exploring efficient blockchain transactions today—experience the future of decentralized tech.