One key difference outlined is the limit imposed on extra transactions, which stands at 100 transactions at any one time by default. This threshold is notably less when compared to another benchmark, such as a 20MB size limit, suggesting a more constrained operational capacity for handling transactions simultaneously.

Furthermore, the process for managing evicted transactions is detailed. Unlike certain systems where only transactions at the top of the mempool are considered, this approach ensures all evicted transactions pass through an extra transactions pool. This methodology does not prioritize transactions based on their position in the mempool, indicating a non-discriminatory treatment towards transaction processing.

Additionally, it's mentioned that the extra transactions pool lacks indexing. This characteristic means that the selection process for eviction does not prioritize certain transactions over others, further emphasizing a uniform approach to how transactions are handled post-eviction. The significance of these mechanisms comes into play particularly in scenarios where there is enough replacement activity that prevents the top of the mempool transactions from being maintained for extended periods.