What is the computing power situation of each PoW public chain one month after the Ethereum merger?

A month ago, the successful merger of Ethereum opened a new era for it, and Ethereum miners became a historic term, accompanied by the disappearance of its $5 billion mining machine market and 850TH/S huge computing power. Fortunately, the merger is a deterministic event, giving Ethereum miners enough time to make their own choices. Some are actively looking for the next target, some are waiting and watching in the bear market, and some choose to completely withdraw at the end of the ETH POW era. One month after the merger, we take a glimpse of the migration of miners through the changes in the computing power of each public chain. Who is the largest Ethereum computing power migration destination? Which projects have the greatest impact? What changes have the computing power experienced after the migration?

In the past, Ethereum mining used the Ethash algorithm. Since Ethash has a certain degree of ASIC resistance, Ethereum mining machines have not formed large-scale professional ASIC mining machines like Bitcoin mining machines. In terms of computing power, Ethereum graphics card mining machines are also 2 orders of magnitude worse than ASIC mining machines. It is precisely this difference that makes Ethereum graphics card mining machines unable to compete with ASIC professional mining machines on public chains such as BTC and BCH.

Therefore, at present, there are not many POW public chains that can take over the computing power of Ethereum, and they are mainly concentrated in some small and medium-sized public chains such as ETC, ETHW, Ravencoin, ERG, etc.

The main POW public chain data source on the current market: f2pool

Ethereum Classic

Introduction: Ethereum Classic is a public chain forked from The DAO hacker incident, which is also the biggest split in the Ethereum community. Although ETC inherits the original geek spirit of Ethereum, it has gradually fallen behind in subsequent development, and its ecological development cannot compete with the current ETH and other L1. From the computing power growth in the figure below, it can be seen that three days before the Ethereum merger, a huge amount of computing power began to flow in, rising from the initial 55.67TH/S to 234.35TH/S, an increase of nearly four times, and it is the main destination for Ethereum computing power migration.

Current computing power: 146.93TH/S Computing power increase (decrease): After the merger, the computing power increased by 178.68TH/S (based on the computing power on September 1, the same below), an increase of 320.9%, and then the computing power gradually decreased and stabilized at around 150TH/S. The proportion of the original Ethereum computing power: about 21.0% (calculated according to the maximum increase in computing power, the same below), the largest proportion among the following Ethereum computing power migration targets.

ETC computing power change data source: 2miners

ETH POW

Introduction: As a forked chain of the original Ethereum, ETH POW inherits the consensus mechanism of POW and modifies the setting of the difficulty bomb, allowing the original Ethereum miners to directly migrate to mine. As a public chain, ETH POW lacks the support of stablecoins such as USDT/USDC and various DEX, lending and other project parties. Whether it is ecological development or the number of developers, it cannot pose a threat to ETH POS, but it also takes over part of the computing power of the original Ethereum (about 4.32%).

Current computing power: 36.79TH/S Computing power increase (decrease): Compared with the initial computing power of 68.17TH/S, the current computing power of the entire network has decreased by 31.38TH/S, a decrease of 46%. The proportion of the original Ethereum computing power: about 4.32%

ETHW hashrate change data source: 2miners

Ravencoin

Introduction: Ravencoin is a blockchain platform mainly for Token asset transactions. It was forked from Bitcoin in September 2017. Since the beginning of September and after the merger with Ethereum, the price of Ravencoin has risen by nearly 2 times. After that, with the decline in Token prices, the computing power has also declined accordingly. The current computing power fluctuates around 15TH/S.

Current computing power: 14.9TH/S Computing power increase (decrease): During the merger period, the computing power increased from 2.6TH/S in early September to a maximum of 20.16TH/S, with a maximum increase of 675.3%. Proportion of original Ethereum computing power: about 2.06%

Ravencoin computing power change data source: 2miners

Ergo

Introduction: Ergo is a smart contract platform based on the Autolykos consensus mechanism (a type of POW), with various scripting languages ​​and zero-knowledge proof as the core, supporting various new financial interaction models.

Current computing power: 58.8TH/S

Hashrate increase (decrease): During the merger, the hashrate increased from 15.23TH/S to 175.11TH/S, a 10-fold increase. Half a month later, the hashrate was moved out on a large scale, and once dropped to 20.23TH/S, almost wiping out the previous increase. The current hashrate is stable at around 50TH/S. The proportion of the original Ethereum hashrate: Calculated according to the maximum value, it is about 18.8%.

Ergo hashrate change data source: 2miners

Conflux

Introduction: Conflux is a domestic public chain that uses a tree-graph consensus algorithm to achieve further development in transaction throughput (TPS) and confirmation time. As early as August 10, Conflux launched a community proposal to change its PoW mining algorithm to Ethash to make it easier for Ethereum miners to switch to Conflux.

Current computing power: 2.97TH/S Computing power increase (decrease): from 1.03TH/S before the merger to 3.29TH/S after the merger, an increase of 329%. The current computing power is stable at around 2.8TH/S. There is no obvious phenomenon of computing power escape after the merger, which is different from other projects. Proportion of original Ethereum computing power: 0.26%

Conflux computing power change data source: minerstat

In addition to the above-mentioned major computing power migration projects, there are many small public chains whose network computing power has also surged to varying degrees after the huge Ethereum computing power surged. For example: Neoxa's computing power has increased by nearly 6 times, Flux (Zelcash)'s computing power has increased by 4.3 times, Firo's computing power has increased by nearly 10 times, and Bitcoin Gode's computing power has increased by 4.4 times. However, because the ecology and community effects of these public chains themselves are very weak, although the growth rate is large, the Ethereum computing power they undertake only accounts for a very small part, which can be basically ignored.

Summarize:

Through the changes in the above public chain computing power graph, we can summarize the following conclusions:

1-3 days before the Ethereum merger, the computing power on Ethereum fled on a large scale and began to look for new targets to mine, and created the peak computing power of the above-mentioned public chains on the day of the merger.

After the computing power was migrated in, the degree of computing power retention varied. Basically, within 3-5 days after the merger, the computing power of the above-mentioned public chains began to flee again. This also shows that the mining sustainability of these small currencies is not friendly. Whether it is ETC or ETHW, they cannot achieve the sustainable mining income on the original Ethereum.

Within 3-5 days after the merger, the market began to decline, and the coin prices of the above projects showed a trend similar to that of computing power, which further proved that the coin price will determine the change of computing power.

If we calculate the computing power added by the above-mentioned public chains from September 1 to October 15, we can roughly estimate that the computing power flowing out of Ethereum is about 250TH/S, accounting for 29% of Ethereum's original computing power. That is to say, about 60% of Ethereum's computing power has withdrawn from the mining market or is still in the wait-and-see stage. As a representative of graphics card mining, the withdrawal of such a large computing power of Ethereum will naturally affect the graphics card market. According to Northeast Securities, 17 million 3060-level cards or 42 million 1060-level cards were used for mining (mainly used for Ethereum) in the past. That is to say, the withdrawal of 60% of Ethereum's computing power has brought about the selling pressure of tens of millions of graphics cards. Combined with the bear market and the reduction of demand in the overall environment, this round of downward cycle of the graphics card market may be very long.

At present, with the large-scale application of POS, the number of targets that support physical mining machines for mining is decreasing. In addition, with the increase in DAPP application scenarios, the public chain under the POW mechanism is limited by its insufficient performance and may find it more difficult to compete in the future ecosystem. If BTC is excluded, the future mining machine market may shrink further.