Solana Under Fire for This Unexpected Performance Blowout

Solana (SOL) is facing intense criticism from an unexpected performance blowout that has been spotted on the blockchain. Dave, a Cardano SPO, highlighted the issue on X in a post that has generated reactions among users in the space.

Critics accuse Solana of “fake it till you make it” strategy

Notably, Dave observed that Solana is allowing bots to artificially inflate usage statistics. Dave’s major concern is that nearly all of these data are false, as shown with transaction figures on the blockchain. He highlighted that a single bot carried out 11 million transactions within the space of 30 days.

You Might Also Like

However, 99.95% of those 11 million transactions failed to go through. Curiously, despite the huge failure rate, it is reflected in Solana’s history in the volume of transactions conducted.

Similarly, on Sept. 1, 2025, a total of 658,460 transactions were carried out, with only 155 transactions, representing 0.024%, being successful. The remaining 658,310 transactions, or 99.97%, failed to go through.

Dave insisted that Solana is misleading users with its numbers as most of the figures on “transactions per second” are fake. He noted that these do not represent actual measures of Solana’s scalability.

The Cardano SPO suggests that Solana has created a “fake it till you make it” situation in the crypto space.

Community divided as Solana’s reputation faces scrutiny

A user, in reaction to the post, argued that the over-bloating of transaction figures is a result of Solana’s super cheap fees. He maintained that it has led to the exploitation of the metrics.

You Might Also Like

Transaction fees remain a major measurement metric in the crypto space, as they suggest a blockchain’s growing role. News of Solana flipping Ethereum in transaction fees made major headlines in February 2025, indicating how relevant it is to users in the ecosystem.

In June 2024, Justin Bons, Cyber Capital founder, rose in defense of the Solana blockchain. At the time, Bons claimed that the network correctly marked successful transactions, distinguishing such from failed ones.