1 -The account model doesn’t require much space as the UTXO model, why is that a benefit?
Unlike bitcoin, which due to its UTXO Input-Output model requires a certain amount of space, ETH does not list and analyze its inputs and outputs as meticulously as Bitcoin. Eth is based on a global accounting balance of the balance operating at +1, -1 in principle. If I have 10 ETH and send 2, I will have 8 left without sub-accounts from the various previous transactions making up my balance as is the case for Bitcoin.
Thus the operating model of the space and the size of the blocks differs fundamentally from bitcoin, and one could think that ETH has a block size much greater than BTC, and therefore, can include a number of transactions. much larger than on BTC 1000 to 2500-3000. And this is true because BTC makes an average of 7 transactions per second compared to 13 to 16 for ETH.
However, ETH block transactions are not calculated in bytes like bitcoin but in terms of gas. Each transaction has an initial cost of 21,000 gases, this increases considerably depending on the operational complexity of the transactions, for example via the interaction of multiple smart contracts on the challenge. The size of the blocks were recently fixed at an extensibility of up to 15 million gases per block with the EIP 1559. Gas should not be confused as being the fixed unit cost of each transaction, namely 21,000 gases, and the gas fees which it is dynamic and variable and is calculated in GWEI (Giga Wei) or 1 ETH = 1 billion
of WEI or 1GWEI.
If we stick to the fixed gas without the dynamic gas fee, we can estimate that with a maximum today of 15 million gas / block we could make 700 transactions per block, today every 16 seconds.
The gas fees correspond to the price of the initial gas * by the price of the fixed surplus of gas necessary for the routing of the transaction and according to the temporality that one chooses as well as of the congestion or not of the network within the mempool. ETH. So if we choose to pay a fixed cost of 21,000 gas * per 30 GWEI (or 30 billion WEI) = 30 * 21,000 = 630,000 GWEI of costs.
Thus, the size of the transactions at a fixed cost and dynamic fees means that the sizes of the transactions are highly variable from one transaction to another.
Two parameters to understand in this structural gas price incentive:
A - If the price of ETH increases the price of gas decreases and vice versa.
B - If the overall demand for transactions is strong on the network, the price of gas increases and vice versa.
2 -How is the account model not as great as the UTXO model for privacy?
The ETH account model is not as efficient as that of BTC because the latter is unitarily more fungible than BTC which is not, because of the hyper traceability of the UTXO input-output model, because each input transaction corresponds to an output. In addition, the overall balance of an issuer breaks down into multiple unrealized expenses resulting from multiple previous transactions. This makes bitcoin much more traceable and therefore much more fungible. An ether, from a unit point of view is always equal to another ether, while for Bitcoin we can distinguish a legal bitcoin from a bitcoin having been used for purchases or more dubious uses.
However ETH, is much less confidential than BTC, the reason is that with bitcoin and its model of UTXO, allows that we can with certain specific functionality integrate several entries and several exits, or the entries come from different portfolios. and the outputs go to different wallets that can be the same.
Likewise when we make a single entry and exit, part of the transaction is returned to us as an unspent exit if we do not use all of our assets. We can better dissected the transactional origin but less well attached to a particular address knowing that with each transaction the return of the unspent part of our output goes to a new public key normally derived from the same public key . While this is not possible on ETH which does not perform a return but just a count of the current global balance of an already existing public key and from which the sent transaction is subtracted, there is therefore no derivation of the public key via the application of the UTXO model, but just a digital count from an existing public key after the transaction is signed.