SagaChain vs. MultiverseX

A Grok comparison of two different approaches to sharding

1. Architecture

• SagaOS/SagaChain (Adi):
• Design: A sharded layer-1 blockchain powered by SagaOS, running XBOM’s object-oriented logic across 50 shards (256–1,000 nodes each). Private enclaves add a hybrid privacy layer.
• Structure: Homogeneous — all shards share SagaOS and a global class tree. Enclaves segregate private data/code; public shards handle transparent operations.
• Consensus: Hybrid — PoS BFT creates blocks, 15-second PoW secures them, final PoS verifies, and hash braiding links shards.
• MultiversX (Elrond):
• Design: A sharded layer-1 blockchain focused on scalability, security, and metaverse applications (rebranded from Elrond in November 2022). Uses Adaptive State Sharding for high throughput.
• Structure: Sharded — employs network, transaction, and state sharding with ~3,200 nodes across shards dynamically managed by a metachain for coordination.
• Consensus: Secure Proof-of-Stake (SPoS), a PoS variant with ~1-second block times and ~5–6 second finality, optimized for sharding.
• Comparison: Both are sharded layer-1s, but SagaChain’s SagaOS and private enclaves emphasize privacy and object-orientation, while MultiversX prioritizes metaverse scalability with a leaner sharding model. SagaChain’s hybrid consensus is more complex; MultiversX’s SPoS is simpler and faster.

2. Sharding (Including Enclaves)

• SagaOS/SagaChain (Adi):
• Approach: 50 shards process transactions in parallel, with private enclaves encrypting data/code within shards. SagaScale moves accounts; hash braiding ensures shard cohesion. Targets dynamic sharding for thousands of shards.
• Granularity: Fine — shards are uniform, with enclaves as private subdomains.
• Scale: 50 shards in Adi, expandable dynamically.
• MultiversX:
• Approach: Adaptive State Sharding splits the network into shards (currently ~3–4, dynamically adjustable), handling network, transaction, and state processing in parallel. A metachain coordinates shard interactions.
• Granularity: Fine — combines all three sharding types (network, transaction, state) for maximum efficiency.
• Scale: ~15,000 TPS in practice, with a theoretical ~100,000 TPS target.
• Comparison: Both employ fine-grained sharding, but SagaChain’s enclaves add privacy within shards, while MultiversX’s Adaptive State Sharding focuses on throughput without privacy enclaves. SagaChain’s hash braiding unifies shards; MultiversX uses a metachain.

3. State Management

• SagaOS/SagaChain (Adi):
• Model: Persistent, object-oriented via XBOM. Account containers hold objects (e.g., “pharma” with “delivered” state), with enclaves encrypting private data/code for authorized nodes.
• Execution: SagaOS runs transactions shard-locally, with parallel execution for independent objects. Enclave nodes process private logic.
• Persistence: Native — state persists in containers, movable via SagaScale.
• MultiversX:
• Model: Account-based with state sharding — each shard manages a portion of the global state (balances, smart contracts). No object-oriented structure or native privacy.
• Execution: Transactions execute in parallel across shards, with smart contracts (written in Rust or C, compiled to WASM) processed shard-specifically. No privacy layer.
• Persistence: Persistent in a sharded state ledger, fully public.
• Comparison: SagaChain’s XBOM is object-oriented with enclave privacy, while MultiversX’s sharded state is account-based and public. SagaOS enhances privacy; MultiversX prioritizes scalable state distribution.

4. Scalability

• SagaOS/SagaChain (Adi):
• Capacity: 50 shards at 66 TPS each (e.g., 4 blocks/min/shard × 50 = 3,300 TPS in Adi). Dynamic sharding aims for millions of TPS with thousands of shards.
• Node Scale: 12,800–50,000 nodes (50 × 256–1,000) test large validator sets per shard.
• Limits: 15-second PoW slows finality (~30 seconds); dynamic allocation is pivotal.
• MultiversX:
• Capacity: ~15,000 TPS in practice (mainnet 2025), with a theoretical ~100,000 TPS via Adaptive State Sharding. Scales with shard count and network demand.
• Node Scale: ~3,200 nodes across shards, balanced for decentralization and efficiency.
• Limits: Current TPS is robust but below theoretical max; shard scaling is dynamic but not yet at millions.
• Comparison: SagaChain’s sharding offers higher current capacity (up to 3,300 TPS) and potential (millions) than MultiversX’s ~100,000 TPS target, but MultiversX’s ~5–6 second finality beats SagaChain’s up to 30 seconds. Enclaves don’t cap SagaChain’s scale.

5. Interoperability

• SagaOS/SagaChain (Adi):
• Approach: Internal focus — SagaOS unifies shards, with enclaves securing private data/code. External interoperability isn’t prioritized; the class tree could enable bridges.
• Potential: Enclaves could process cross-chain data privately, but not yet implemented.
• MultiversX:
• Approach: Strong — xFabric and xPortal tools (post-2022 rebrand) enable metaverse and cross-chain integrations (e.g., Ethereum via bridges). Focuses on metaverse ecosystem connectivity.
• Strength: Growing interoperability with tools like xWorlds and external bridges.
• Comparison: MultiversX excels in interoperability with metaverse and cross-chain focus, outpacing SagaChain’s internal orientation. SagaChain’s enclaves limit external connectivity potential for now.

6. Consensus

• SagaOS/SagaChain (Adi):
• Mechanism: Hybrid — PoS BFT, 15-second PoW, final PoS, and hash braiding. Up tp 30-second finality with high security.
• Security: PoW adds computational proof; braiding prevents shard isolation.
• Trade-Off: Speed vs. security and privacy.
• MultiversX:
• Mechanism: Secure Proof-of-Stake (SPoS) — PoS with random validator selection and shard reassignment, ~1-second block times, and ~5–6 second finality.
• Security: Tolerates up to 1/3 malicious nodes; shard shuffling enhances resilience.
• Trade-Off: Fast and efficient, no PoW layer.
• Comparison: SagaChain’s hybrid consensus trades speed (30 seconds) for security (PoW + braiding) and privacy. MultiversX’s SPoS is faster (5–6 seconds) and simpler, optimized for sharding.

7. Privacy

• SagaOS/SagaChain (Adi):
• Approach: Private (Shard) Enclaves encrypt data/code, restricting execution to authorized nodes. Public shards remain transparent, enabling a hybrid model.
• Strength: Native privacy within a public chain.
• MultiversX:
• Approach: No native privacy — all transactions and state are public. Privacy requires app-level solutions (e.g., zero-knowledge proofs), not built into the protocol.
• Strength: Relies on external tools, not inherent privacy.
• Comparison: SagaChain’s enclaves provide built-in privacy, a clear edge over MultiversX’s public-only design.

Summary Table

Conclusion

SagaOS/SagaChain in Adi (50 shards, 12,800–50,000 nodes) theoretically outscales MultiversX’s current 15,000 TPS, although now at 3,300 TPS now and each shard added scale capacity, for millions in theory, driven by XBOM’s sharding and private enclaves — offering native privacy MultiversX lacks without external tools. SagaChain’s hybrid consensus (30-second finality) prioritizes security over MultiversX’s faster SPoS (~5–6 seconds), while MultiversX excels in interoperability with metaverse tools (xFabric, xPortal) and bridges.