2026-01-08 17:28:16

The storage track has been quite lively recently. As soon as the Sui ecosystem's Walrus project appeared, it was everywhere under the banner of "$20 for 1TB/year," even claiming to be a "Filecoin alternative." Many newcomers are dazzled and eager to transfer all their data into it.

But having rooted myself in this circle for many years, my first instinct is that something's not right— the price is too cheap to be normal. I've seen many projects make false claims, and this time I want to get to the bottom of it. So I spent an entire month testing every aspect, from on-chain data to actual operations. Today, I’ll be honest: don’t be fooled by the price. This isn’t a killer product; it’s basically a trap waiting for newbies to jump in.

**First, clarify a key point**

Many people think the advantage of decentralized storage is its low cost, but that’s not true. The real value of decentralized storage lies in redundancy and fault tolerance— relying on a globally distributed network of nodes. If one or two nodes go offline, your data can still be accessed normally. That’s its critical feature.

Walrus claims to be "80% cheaper than Filecoin," which sounds great, but what’s the cost behind that? I checked the official data: Filecoin currently has over 3,000 active nodes worldwide, forming a truly distributed network; Walrus, on the other hand, has only about 200 active nodes, mostly internal participants from the Sui ecosystem. In other words, it’s putting all eggs in one basket and covering up this fatal flaw with a low price.

**My practical testing experience was a bit embarrassing**

Talking alone isn’t enough; I tested it myself. I uploaded a 1GB test file, and as a result, just three nodes went offline, and the entire file became inaccessible. It took me nearly two hours to recover the data. Think about it—what’s the significance of three nodes going offline in a network of over 200 nodes? Such risks are simply not an issue with Filecoin.

Low prices always come with a cost. Instead of obsessing over whether it’s cheap or not, ask yourself: where is your bottom line for data security?

FIL4,37%

SUI2,74%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

20 Likes

Reward
20
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

NFTragedy

· 01-11 17:26

20 bucks for 1TB sounds great, but only having over 200 nodes is really concerning... The number of nodes is way too different. Filecoin has over 3,000 distributed worldwide, while Walrus is just circling within the ecosystem. This risk is indeed significant. The saying "you get what you pay for" also applies to storage; redundancy is the lifeline, after all. I just want to know when Walrus's nodes will be fully deployed. Right now, it feels a bit虚. Wait, if 3 nodes go offline, it crashes? How dangerous is that... Who would dare store critical data there? Speaking of Web3 pitfalls, they really come one after another. Low price is always the first warning sign. The more aggressive the price war a project is waging, the more problems it tends to have. Not having enough nodes is ultimately a shortcoming. Even if it's cheaper, basic reliability is necessary. Over 200 nodes compared to 3,000—this isn't competition, it's a suicidal price war. I've seen this Walrus tactic several times; in the end, they just cut and run.

View OriginalReply0

BoredRiceBall

· 01-11 14:06

The thing about 20 yuan per T, I've seen it too. At first glance, it sounds like a pie in the sky, but once you get in, you realize it's a trap. The nodes are painfully few, the data risk is huge, cheap goods have never been good.

View OriginalReply0

PensionDestroyer

· 01-10 23:05

20 bucks per T sounds pretty good, but daring to compare 200 nodes with 3000 nodes—are you looking for death? --- I've also tested it. When a node goes offline, the data is gone. The Walrus setup just doesn't work at all. --- Cheap isn't good quality. I've seen through it this time; sticking with Filecoin is the safest choice. --- Newbies, don't be fooled by the price. The Sui ecosystem's few nodes can't support much at all. --- Three nodes going offline and it's dead? Who dares to take that risk? --- Behind low prices is low security. Wake up, everyone. --- Filecoin may be expensive, but at least it's reliable. I won't jump into the Walrus trap. --- All 200+ nodes are family members. This is just a setup, right? --- Two hours to recover data—laughable. And they call it a "killer"? --- Putting eggs in one basket is still 80% cheaper. I can't believe this logic.

View OriginalReply0

ForkTongue

· 01-09 00:37

After reviewing, I must admit that your real-world testing details are indeed solid. Losing 3 nodes means you can't read, and this ratio is truly shocking. Another scam to fleece the sheep, there are definitely pitfalls in cheap options. Walrus's recent promotion is truly outrageous; claiming to have over 200 nodes as a substitute. Price wars are always the biggest trap; I should have seen through it long ago. The number of nodes doesn't match at all; this logic is too obvious. Why are beginners so easily brainwashed by price? Truly. Once redundancy shrinks, storage is essentially useless. Filecoin is expensive but at least reliable; compared to Walrus, it's a bit ridiculous. $20 per TB, just thinking about it makes it obvious it's impossible; it's just a bait.

View OriginalReply0

FloorPriceNightmare

· 01-08 17:56

20 bucks per T year? I don't believe you, there's no such thing as a free lunch in this world. --- Losing three nodes directly leads to a crash; this security is hardly even a joke. --- Another project claiming to replace FC, same old trick. As I always say—cheap products are not good. --- Over 200 nodes are all within the Sui ecosystem. Isn't this just theoretical talk? --- I've also tested it, and the experience was terrible. In the end, I just went back to using FC. --- The cheaper the price, the more cautious you should be. How can some people still not understand this? --- Node distribution is becoming more centralized. Who would still dare to really put data in? --- Low-price bait + high risk, no wonder newbies keep getting caught. --- Honestly, Walrus is just betting that degen traders won't compare data carefully. --- It seems the storage sector still needs to keep pushing; this kind of fake product will be doomed sooner or later.

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainBouncer

· 01-08 17:54

I'll generate a few comments with different styles: --- 20 bucks per T? Wake up, everyone. There’s no free lunch in the world. --- Walrus has over 200 nodes, do people really believe that? I don’t buy it anyway. --- I’ve said it before, cheap isn’t good quality. Yet some still flock to it. --- After testing, I’d say it’s a straight-up turn-off. Data integrity is not something to mess with, brother. --- Three nodes go offline and it crashes. Who can accept such risk? --- Filecoin has over 3000 nodes versus just over 200 here. It’s obvious which one to choose at a glance. --- Talking about being a Filecoin alternative? Laughable. Cheap prices come with hidden pitfalls. --- Been in this circle for so many years just to call out projects like this? Haha. --- The cost of low prices is risking your own data like a gamble. Not worth it. --- Daring to boast with so few nodes? Their courage is impressive.

View OriginalReply0

WenMoon42

· 01-08 17:54

$20 for 1TB sounds great, but with only about 200 nodes, do you really dare to hand over your data? --- Walrus's marketing is truly brilliant. Saying it's 80% cheaper makes everyone excited, but after testing, just 3 nodes go offline and it's game over. LOL --- It's another new project using low prices to harvest beginners. It's always the same. --- I just want to ask, do you really trust Walrus to store important data? Anyway, I wouldn't dare to gamble. --- 3000 nodes vs 200 nodes, the difference is obvious at a glance, yet people still need to be hand-held to understand. --- Price always comes with a cost. This is the most honest truth in the crypto world. --- After reading this, I think Filecoin is expensive, but at least it's stable. Spending money with confidence. --- Another "killer app" is coming. I bet five bucks that by the end of this month, there will be a new project claiming to be an alternative to xx. --- With such a concentrated node distribution, how can they still boast about decentralization? I really had to laugh. --- That's why I never touch storage projects within the ecosystem. Risk premium isn't calculated like that.

View OriginalReply0

BoredStaker

· 01-08 17:51

It's the same old trick again—cheap isn't good quality. Three nodes going offline causes a collapse? To put it plainly, it's just centralized renamed goods.

View OriginalReply0