Ever wonder what the actual transaction throughput looks like across the blockchain network? It's a critical metric that often gets overlooked when we talk about adoption rates. The number of daily transactions tells you so much—whether the chain is seeing real organic growth, how congested the network gets during bull runs, and whether users are actually paying the gas fees or just watching from the sidelines. Beyond the headline figures, there's the whole question of transaction quality too. Are these high-value transfers or just spam and dust trades? What does meaningful blockchain activity really look like when you dig into the data? Your estimates on this would be interesting to hear—whether you think we're underestimating or overestimating the real on-chain volume.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
14 Likes
Reward
14
9
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
PanicSeller
· 01-07 12:19
It seems like we're discussing on-chain real transaction volume... To be honest, most people are looking at fake numbers, a bunch of garbage transactions to put on a facade, and truly valuable activities are scarce.
View OriginalReply0
NFTArchaeologis
· 01-05 06:37
On-chain data is like ancient manuscript fragments; the surface transaction volume figures actually conceal many truths. What truly matters are the value transfers that have been accumulated over time, rather than dust-like junk transactions.
View OriginalReply0
GasGrillMaster
· 01-04 23:03
ngl Most people only look at the surface numbers when checking trading volume, but the actual proportion of dust transactions might be much higher than you think...
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-a180694b
· 01-04 23:02
ngl Most people just look at trading numbers to brag, never caring whether those are trash trades or real volume.
View OriginalReply0
ContractCollector
· 01-04 22:59
Always watch the TPS data, but few truly understand it... Most of it is inflated garbage transactions.
View OriginalReply0
PseudoIntellectual
· 01-04 22:58
On-chain real throughput can indeed be misleading; it's better to look at the quality rather than just transaction numbers.
View OriginalReply0
SolidityStruggler
· 01-04 22:45
Honestly, most of the trading volume numbers that people look at are fake, and the truly valuable on-chain activities are scarce.
View OriginalReply0
GmGmNoGn
· 01-04 22:43
Real on-chain activity is so limited; most of it is just spam transactions fooling people.
View OriginalReply0
NestedFox
· 01-04 22:34
Buddy, these numbers are fake; the real trading volume has long been drowned out by wash trading.
Ever wonder what the actual transaction throughput looks like across the blockchain network? It's a critical metric that often gets overlooked when we talk about adoption rates. The number of daily transactions tells you so much—whether the chain is seeing real organic growth, how congested the network gets during bull runs, and whether users are actually paying the gas fees or just watching from the sidelines. Beyond the headline figures, there's the whole question of transaction quality too. Are these high-value transfers or just spam and dust trades? What does meaningful blockchain activity really look like when you dig into the data? Your estimates on this would be interesting to hear—whether you think we're underestimating or overestimating the real on-chain volume.