⚖️YOM vs Aethir

In the rapidly evolving decentralized cloud gaming space, YOM and Aethir have emerged as two competing platforms offering node-based solutions for game streaming and infrastructure decentralization. While both platforms share the goal of democratizing access to GPU resources, their approaches, pricing, and long-term value propositions differ significantly. This comparison provides an in-depth analysis of YOM and Aethir across key factors such as pricing, revenue models, sustainability, and tokenomics.

---

Node Pricing and Accessibility

One of the most crucial factors when evaluating decentralized node opportunities is the entry cost, which significantly influences adoption and network expansion.

Aspect	YOM	Aethir
Average Floor Price	$199 per node	~$3451 per node (estimated)
Node Delegation	Yes	Yes
Hardware Requirements	Heavy (GPU load)	Minimal (no load)

Key Takeaways:

• YOM offers an affordable entry at just $199 per node, making it highly accessible to a broader audience and reducing barriers to participation.

• Aethir, in contrast, has a significantly higher estimated node floor price (~$3451), which may deter many potential operators from entering the ecosystem.

• Both platforms support node delegation, enabling users to earn passive income without technical expertise, but YOM’s lower costs make delegation more attractive and scalable.

---

Revenue Model and Earnings Potential

For node operators, the primary concern is consistent and sustainable revenue generation.

Aspect	YOM	Aethir
External Network Rewards	$32 - $121 (based on demand and workload)	$0/month (at present)
Revenue Source	External revenue from studios/advertisers	Token incentives only
Depletion Risk	No (ongoing revenue model)	Yes (limited token supply)

Key Takeaways:

• YOM provides tangible external revenue streams from studios, brands, and broadcasters, ensuring a steady income of $32 - $121 per node based on network saturation and workload allocation.

• Aethir currently lacks external revenue inflows, with node rewards purely dependent on pre-allocated tokens from their supply, posing a sustainability risk.

• YOM’s earnings potential is market-driven, while Aethir's model relies on finite token reserves that may deplete over time, reducing long-term operator incentives.

---

Tokenomics and Sustainability

A sustainable tokenomics model is critical for ensuring long-term growth and value appreciation for node operators and investors.

Aspect	YOM	Aethir
Token Model	Deflationary (burns on usage)	Inflationary (staking, airdrops)
Reward Staking	Yes	Yes
Implied Node FDV (3 Years)	Uncapped: ~$75M (25K nodes)	Capped: ~$450M (75K nodes)
Current Token Rewards FDV	$YOM = $25M (1x)	$ATH = $1.500M (60x)

Key Takeaways:

• YOM employs a deflationary token model, where 5% of every transaction is burned, ensuring the circulating supply decreases over time, thereby increasing scarcity and potential value appreciation.

• Aethir’s inflationary model relies on staking and airdrops, which can lead to long-term dilution and decreased token value as more tokens enter circulation.

• YOM offers an uncapped growth potential, whereas Aethir’s model is capped, limiting opportunities for further expansion.

• Aethir's current FDV is highly inflated, making it 66.6 times larger than YOM’s, which may pose a significant risk for long-term sustainability.

---

Operational Longevity and Rewards Stability

Sustainability and reliability of node operations over time are crucial for ensuring long-term profitability and network participation.

Aspect	YOM	Aethir
Free Token Airdrop Farming	No	15% of token supply allocated
Depletes Over Time	No	Yes

Key Takeaways:

• YOM focuses on long-term utility and revenue generation, avoiding token depletion issues by tying rewards to real-world usage.

• Aethir’s model depends heavily on the distributed of a pre-allocated supply of tokens, which will eventually be depleted, leading to uncertainty for node operators.

---

Ecosystem Value and Utility

The long-term success of a decentralized cloud gaming network depends on its ability to attract users, content creators, and investors.

Aspect	YOM	Aethir
Node Utility	Nodes actively stream games	Nodes do not stream games
Revenue Model	FIAT-based income from gaming partners	Purely token-based model
Market Positioning	Gaming-focused with an expanding ecosystem	Unclear, potentially speculative

Key Takeaways:

• YOM nodes provide real utility by actively streaming games, attracting external clients and revenue with a low FDV token, focusing on sustained long-term value.

• Aethir nodes currently do not stream games, focusing instead on farming tokens from a allocation without external revenue pipeline or sustained buy-in.

In summary, YOM provides a practical, sustainable, and cost-effective solution for decentralized cloud gaming, while Aethir’s model poses significant long-term risks due to high entry costs, lack of real-world utility, and inflationary tokenomics.