Cheapest blockchain transaction fee, live across 15 L1 and L2 chains
BlockchainsLinea
Trails$0.0145
- p99
- $0.0825
- rank
- #11
- samples
- 20,159
Solana
Leads$0.000486
- p99
- $0.000513
- rank
- #4
- samples
- 20,159
Linea vs Solana
Solana leads on both live benchmarks. Solana wins on Cheapest blockchain transaction fee, live across 15 L1 and L2 chains ($0.000486 vs $0.0145), Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery (45.45 s vs 3.8 min).
Linea
ConsenSys zkEVM rollup with a prover-bound block cadence. Idle periods batch into longer intervals (p50 around 3-6 s) while busy periods produce blocks closer to the nominal 2 s mark.
Solana
Proof-of-History sequencing combined with Tower BFT consensus. Probabilistic finality at 32 confirmed slots. Slot time around 400 milliseconds.
Side by side measurements
Fastest Wormhole VAA finalization by source chain, live latency
BridgesLinea
No data in window
Solana
Trails12.57 s
- p99
- 19.74 s
- rank
- #9
- samples
- 7,491
Fastest Chainlink CCIP source chain by end-to-end delivery latency
BridgesLinea
No data in window
Solana
Trails1.2 min
- rank
- #2
- samples
- 84provisional
Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery
BridgesLinea
Trails3.8 min
- rank
- #16
- samples
- 41provisional
Solana
Leads45.45 s
- p99
- 2.0 min
- rank
- #9
- samples
- 538
Frequently asked questions
Linea vs Solana: which one is better?
Linea and Solana are compared on 4 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. Solana leads on Cheapest blockchain transaction fee, live across 15 L1 and L2 chains. See the live table on this page for every metric.
Which is cheaper, Linea or Solana?
On the Cheapest blockchain transaction fee, live across 15 L1 and L2 chains benchmark, Solana leads at $0.000486 versus Linea at $0.0145. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.
How is the Linea vs Solana 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.
Related comparisons
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.