Quote from: Sub-Ether on July 31, 2015, 08:24:30 AM

Quote from: thelonecrouton on July 31, 2015, 08:06:34 AM

Quote from: Macrochip on July 31, 2015, 08:01:01 AM

Quote from: thelonecrouton on July 31, 2015, 07:41:46 AM

Quote from: Macrochip on July 30, 2015, 08:51:19 PM

Bitcoin currently handles 7 unconfirmed tx per second + confirmation/waiting time
DASH handles 10 confirmed tx per second and you can walk out the shop with the merchant safe and happy.

Not quite right, the entire Bitcoin network handles a maximum of 7 txes per second. Each IX only requires a tiny subset of the 3000 MN total to work. You're looking at tx throughput two orders of magnitude+ better than BTC, each one in seconds, not minutes/hours.

So if the subset is 10 for example, at 3k M-Nodes the TPS would be 3,000 as well, I assume? That's 1k more than VISA handles atm.
This is a very interesting read on that matter: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability

If 10 MNs are needed for each IX then with 3000 MNs you'd have theoretical capacity for 300 simultaneous IX's. There are going to be overheads, and some MNs may be tied up doing DS or something else, but you get the idea.

I don't know if or how the concept of MN multithreading/multitasking applies, but there's probably room to squeeze a shitload more efficiency out of the system yet.

300 is not the maximum, Evan said its down to the amount of memory of the masternodes, the upper limit is unknown.
We were sending hundreds of IX in testnet with only 150 masternodes and they all worked up until someone reduced the number of nodes, there looked to be a failure point were they return to proof of work but its pretty low node count wise and when scaled up to 3000 nodes may be impossible to break due to the strength of the network.

Splendid. Three+ orders of magnitude better tx throughput than Bitcoin then.