Lava Network vs Nodies

Lava Network leads on 1 of 4 shared benchmarks, Nodies on 3. Lava Network wins on Most reliable free public RPC, correctness incidents across 7 EVM chains (4 vs 162). Nodies wins on Fastest free public RPC for Ethereum, BNB, Polygon and 23 more chains (228 ms vs 309 ms), Fastest free Ethereum RPC, live no-key endpoint latency (189 ms vs 395 ms), Fastest free Arbitrum RPC, live no-key endpoint latency (181 ms vs 272 ms).

Read methodology Last measured Wed, 19 Aug 2026 05:22:14 UTCWindow: rolling 24h4 shared benchmarks

Lava Network

Lava Network is a decentralized RPC mesh with permissionless validators. Public no-key endpoints work for Ethereum (`eth1.lava.build`) and Arbitrum (`arb1.lava.build`); other chains require an account-issued key.

Nodies

Nodies is the surviving public-RPC frontend for POKT Network's decentralized infrastructure. Per-chain subdomains like `eth-pokt.nodies.app`, `polygon-pokt.nodies.app`, `arb-pokt.nodies.app`. Covers most major EVM chains no-key.

Side by side measurements

Fastest free public RPC for Ethereum, BNB, Polygon and 23 more chains (plus Solana and Polkadot)

RPCs

Lava Network

Trails

309 ms

p99: 2.81 s
rank: #10
samples: 25,378

Nodies

Leads

228 ms

p99: 494 ms
rank: #5
samples: 25,860

Per chain · per region

Chain	Provider	US-East	EU-West	Singapore	Aggregate
Ethereum	Lava Network	394 ms	393 ms	397 ms	395 ms
Ethereum	Nodies	194 ms	186 ms	187 ms	189 ms
Arbitrum	Lava Network	265 ms	259 ms	290 ms	271 ms
Arbitrum	Nodies	184 ms	180 ms	178 ms	181 ms

Latency is conditional on success: the harness times only calls returning a valid fresh block, so a mostly-failing endpoint can post a fast p50. Rows below 50 percent success are degraded; unresponsive probes pin below the table. The All chains aggregate favours single-chain foundation endpoints (Base, Binance, Arbitrum, Optimism, Avalanche officials) since they rank on one chain only; use a chain tab for honest comparison. Dead endpoints (cloudflare-eth POST returns -32603) are excluded.

Fastest free Ethereum RPC, live no-key endpoint latency

RPCs

Lava Network

Trails

395 ms

p99: 2.65 s
rank: #6
samples: 4,288

Nodies

Leads

189 ms

p99: 499 ms
rank: #3
samples: 4,320

Per region

Region	Lava Network	Nodies
US-East	393 ms	194 ms
EU-West	394 ms	186 ms
Singapore	397 ms	188 ms

Fastest free Arbitrum RPC, live no-key endpoint latency

RPCs

Lava Network

Trails

272 ms

p99: 4.67 s
rank: #5
samples: 4,263

Nodies

Leads

181 ms

p99: 491 ms
rank: #2
samples: 4,314

Per region

Region	Lava Network	Nodies
US-East	265 ms	184 ms
EU-West	259 ms	180 ms
Singapore	289 ms	178 ms

Most reliable free public RPC, correctness incidents across 7 EVM chains

RPCs

Lava Network

Leads

p99: 83
rank: #3
samples: 188

Nodies

Trails

162

p99: 0
rank: #6
samples: 506

A zero row means no incident was caught in the window, not a proof of correctness. Most providers post zero most days; this bench exists for the days they do not, and for the errors: a blocked eth_getLogs or a balance read gated behind a paid key at 40 blocks of depth counts as an incident because it is one from the caller's seat.

Frequently asked questions

Lava Network vs Nodies: which one is better?

Lava Network and Nodies are compared on 4 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. Lava Network leads on Most reliable free public RPC, correctness incidents across 7 EVM chains. Nodies leads on Fastest free public RPC for Ethereum, BNB, Polygon and 23 more chains. See the live table on this page for every metric.

Which is faster, Lava Network or Nodies?

On the Most reliable free public RPC, correctness incidents across 7 EVM chains benchmark, Lava Network leads at 4 versus Nodies at 162. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.

Which is faster, Lava Network or Nodies?

On the Fastest free public RPC for Ethereum, BNB, Polygon and 23 more chains benchmark, Nodies leads at 228 ms versus Lava Network at 309 ms. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.

How is the Lava Network vs Nodies comparison measured?

Every benchmark on this page uses the same open methodology, published at https://openchainbench.com/methodology. Data is CC-BY-4.0. Measurement harnesses are MIT-licensed.

How this pair was selected

Auto-generated pairs require: both providers in the same benchmark for seven consecutive days, at least 1000 samples per provider, observable third-party search demand, and a public /products/[slug] page on OCB. Editorially curated pairs (like this one) may publish early when search demand is high and data is accruing — panels with fewer than 100 samples are shown as provisional. The full pair ledger is versioned in the public repo.