2026-01-14 08:23:31

Public chain scalability solutions are increasing, and the focus of competition is quietly shifting.

In the early days, everyone was competing over basic functionalities—whether they could run smart contracts. Now, that's no longer the case, as all chains can do this. The question has become: who can reliably handle a large volume of high-frequency asset transactions while supporting complex financial application scenarios?

Sei's approach of using parallel EVM is a direct response to this new stage of competition. It's not just about stacking performance; it's about solving the actual transaction capacity problem from an architectural level.

SEI-2,12%

View Original

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.

7 Likes

Reward
7
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

WhaleMistaker

· 1h ago

The parallel EVM approach is indeed powerful, but can it truly stabilize high-frequency trading scenarios? It still depends on real-world data to prove it.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidatedAgain

· 16h ago

Here comes the person who gets liquidated again. This time, I’m serious—high-frequency trading capacity is indeed the key, but no matter how awesome the architecture is, it can’t save a fool like me who goes all in. After finishing the basic features, now it’s about stability. To put it simply, it’s about whose risk control points are more robust, keeping the borrowing rate from exploding and the liquidation price further away—my recent close call on Sei almost got me forcibly liquidated again. Now I have a bit of respect for this system. But to be fair, parallel EVM sounds impressive. Can it really withstand the high-frequency sell-offs during market frenzy? A thousand gold pieces can’t buy the lesson of “I wish I knew earlier,” brother.

View OriginalReply0

ForkMaster

· 01-14 08:51

Parallel EVM sounds impressive, but in reality, it just distributes transaction processing. It’s similar in concept to my previous fork arbitrage idea. The question is whether this architecture can truly be implemented, or if the project team is just storytelling again.

View OriginalReply0

LidoStakeAddict

· 01-14 08:49

Parallel EVM is indeed impressive, but can it really run stably? --- Honestly, it still depends on who can truly withstand those large transactions, not just how good the numbers look on paper. --- The idea behind Sei is interesting; optimizing the architecture is more practical than simply stacking performance. --- With such fierce competition now, having parallelism alone isn't enough, the key is whether the ecosystem can keep up. --- Finally, someone is seriously considering the transaction capacity aspect; before that, everyone was just blindly competing.

View OriginalReply0

LightningHarvester

· 01-14 08:43

Yeah, you're right. Now building the architecture is the real skill, not just bragging about parameters.

View OriginalReply0

rugdoc.eth

· 01-14 08:33

Parallel EVM sounds good, but can it really withstand the pressure of high-frequency trading? Let's see how it performs in practice. --- If Sei can truly handle high-frequency trading stably, then it's on a different level, but right now everyone is just hyping it up. --- Solving problems from the architecture level is a smarter approach, in my opinion, than just piling on performance. --- High-frequency trading scenarios have such strong demands, why didn't early blockchains think of this? Why only now? --- Parallel EVM sounds like redefining what true scalability is; it feels like there's something there.

View OriginalReply0

MoonRocketTeam

· 01-14 08:30

The parallel EVM approach indeed has some substance; architectural innovation is much more powerful than simply stacking parameters. This is truly the real booster.

View OriginalReply0