Gas comparison between wallets for simple transfers #537
+120
−0
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@ | ||
| --- | ||
| title: "Cost comparison" | ||
|
|
||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| import { Aside } from '/snippets/aside.jsx'; | ||
|
|
||
| <Aside | ||
| type="caution" | ||
| > | ||
| Gas costs can vary between different versions of TVM, keep that in mind. | ||
| </Aside> | ||
|
|
||
| This page provides comprehensive cost comparison for TON wallet contracts, presenting both gas consumption metrics and real-world costs in TON. The cost data includes all transaction fees, not just gas consumption, enabling users to make informed decisions based on their specific use cases. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Key findings by wallet type | ||
|
|
||
| | Version | Optimal batch size | Key advantage | | ||
| | :---------------- | :----------------- | :-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | ||
| | [Wallet V3][v3] | ≤ 8 | Lowest cost for single and small batch transfers | | ||
| | [Wallet V4][v4] | ≤ 8 | Supports plugins | | ||
| | [Wallet V5][v5] | ≥ 8 | Most cost-effective for medium+ batches; <br /> [supports gasless transactions](/standard/wallets/v5#gasless-transactions) | | ||
| | [Highload V3][HL] | ≥ 20 | Less than 1% diff vs V5 after 128 messages; <br /> [parallel processing of messages](/standard/wallets/highload/overview#what-makes-them-different) | | ||
|
|
||
| ## Single transfers | ||
|
|
||
| | Wallet Version | Gas (units) | Cost (TON) | Cost per message (TON) | Difference | | ||
| | --------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ---------------------- | ------------------- | | ||
| | **V3** | 2,994 | 0.002217 | 0.002217 | Most cost-effective | | ||
| | **V4** | 3,308 | 0.002342 | 0.002342 | +5.67% vs V3 | | ||
| | **V5** | 4,939 | 0.003091 | 0.003091 | +39.42% vs V3 | | ||
| | **Highload V3** | 6,200 | 0.003599 | 0.003599 | +62.33% vs V3 | | ||
|
|
||
| ## Batch transfers (4 messages) | ||
|
|
||
| | Wallet Version | Gas (units) | Cost (TON) | Cost per message (TON) | Difference | | ||
| | --------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ---------------------- | ------------------- | | ||
| | **V3** | 4,920 | 0.0048448 | 0.001211 | Most cost-effective | | ||
| | **V4** | 5,234 | 0.0049704 | 0.001243 | +2.59% vs V3 | | ||
| | **V5** | 7,090 | 0.0059768 | 0.001494 | +23.38% vs V3 | | ||
| | **Highload V3** | 7,956 | 0.0082084 | 0.002052 | +69.45% vs V3 | | ||
|
|
||
| ## Batch transfers (8 messages) | ||
|
|
||
| V5 became more effective than V4 and almost tied with V3. | ||
|
|
||
| | Wallet Version | Gas (units) | Cost (TON) | Cost per message (TON) | Difference | | ||
| | --------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ---------------------- | ------------------- | | ||
| | **V3** | 9,840 | 0.0096896 | 0.001211 | Most cost-effective | | ||
| | **V5** | 9,958 | 0.0098248 | 0.001228 | +1.40% vs V3 | | ||
| | **V4** | 10,468 | 0.0099408 | 0.001243 | +2.59% vs V3 | | ||
| | **Highload V3** | 7,956 | 0.0120100 | 0.001501 | +23.95% vs V3 | | ||
|
|
||
| ## Batch transfers (16 messages) | ||
|
|
||
| Highload became more effective than V4 and almost tied with V3. | ||
|
|
||
| | Wallet Version | Gas (units) | Cost (TON) | Cost per message (TON) | Difference | | ||
| | --------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ---------------------- | ------------------- | | ||
| | **V5** | 15,694 | 0.0175432 | 0.001096 | Most cost-effective | | ||
| | **V3** | 19,680 | 0.0193792 | 0.001211 | +10.47% vs V5 | | ||
| | **Highload V3** | 7,956 | 0.0196580 | 0.001229 | +12.06% vs V5 | | ||
| | **V4** | 20,936 | 0.0198816 | 0.001243 | +13.34% vs V5 | | ||
|
|
||
| ## Batch transfers (20 messages) | ||
|
|
||
| Highload is significantly more effective than V3 or V4. | ||
|
|
||
| | Wallet Version | Gas (units) | Cost (TON) | Cost per message (TON) | Difference | | ||
| | --------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ---------------------- | ------------------- | | ||
| | **V5** | 18,562 | 0.0214040 | 0.001070 | Most cost-effective | | ||
| | **Highload V3** | 7,956 | 0.0234852 | 0.001174 | +9.72% vs V5 | | ||
| | **V3** | 24,600 | 0.0242240 | 0.001211 | +13.17% vs V5 | | ||
| | **V4** | 26,170 | 0.0248520 | 0.001243 | +16.11% vs V5 | | ||
|
|
||
| ## Batch transfers (200 messages) | ||
|
|
||
| V5 is still most effective, but difference is negligible. | ||
|
|
||
| | Wallet Version | Gas (units) | Cost (TON) | Cost per message (TON) | Difference | | ||
| | --------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ---------------------- | ------------------- | | ||
| | **V5** | 147,622 | 0.1954632 | 0.000977 | Most cost-effective | | ||
| | **Highload V3** | 7,956 | 0.1963556 | 0.000982 | +0.46% vs V5 | | ||
| | **V3** | 246,000 | 0.2422400 | 0.001211 | +23.93% vs V5 | | ||
| | **V4** | 261,700 | 0.2485200 | 0.001243 | +27.14% vs V5 | | ||
|
|
||
| <Aside> | ||
| Keep in mind that Highload V3 uses two transactions for batch transfers, which incur additional forward fee costs. | ||
| Also, actual gas consumption may vary between runs because the contract must process the existing dictionary state, while in the sandbox, each run usually starts from a clean state. | ||
| </Aside> | ||
|
|
||
| ## Methodology | ||
|
|
||
| ### Sandbox measurements: | ||
|
|
||
| Framework: Blueprint + [@ton/sandbox](/contract-dev/testing/overview) | ||
|
|
||
| Wallets: implementations from [@ton/ton](https://github.com/ton-org/ton) (V3R2, V4, V5R1) and [Highload V3 sources](https://github.com/ton-blockchain/highload-wallet-contract-v3) | ||
|
|
||
| Test scenario: Transfer 0.01 TON with `PAY_GAS_SEPARATELY` mode with unique comment for each message in batches to prevent deduplication. | ||
|
|
||
| ### On-chain measurements: | ||
|
|
||
| Network: TON testnet | ||
|
|
||
| Wallets: Same implementations as sandbox | ||
|
|
||
| Measurement: Actual transaction fees from explorer data | ||
|
|
||
| ## Code examples | ||
|
|
||
| Check [gas-research](https://github.com/memearchivarius/gas-research) and [tolk-bench](https://github.com/ton-blockchain/tolk-bench) projects for code examples. | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. we should move the scripts to https://github.com/ton-org/docs-examples, there should be no links to personal repos in the docs, unless it's some kind of SDK which happens to live there
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Also, why
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Because it's useful example of precise tests
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. we don't want to provide more info than we need to, especially if it is not relevant to the case |
||
|
|
||
| [v3]: /standard/wallets/history#wallet-v3 | ||
|
|
||
| [v4]: /standard/wallets/v4 | ||
|
|
||
| [v5]: /standard/wallets/v5 | ||
|
|
||
| [HL]: /standard/wallets/highload/overview | ||
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.