Blob data pricing decouples from execution gas. EIP-4844 introduces a separate fee market for data blobs, isolating the cost of data availability from the volatile compute auctions on Ethereum's main execution layer.
the-ethereum-roadmap-merge-surge-verge
Blog
What Proto Danksharding Means for Cost Forecasting
EIP-4844 introduces blob-carrying transactions, decoupling execution from data costs. This analysis explains why it marks the end of unpredictable gas wars and the beginning of stable, forecastable L2 transaction pricing.
introduction
THE FORECAST
The Gas Price Casino is Closing
Proto-danksharding (EIP-4844) replaces volatile execution gas with predictable blob storage costs, enabling stable transaction pricing.
Cost forecasting becomes deterministic. Applications like rollups (Arbitrum, Optimism) and L2 bridges (Across, Hop) will submit data in blobs with prices set by a dedicated, less congested market, creating stable, predictable L2 transaction fees.
The new bottleneck is blob capacity. Throughput is capped by the number of blobs per block (~3-6 initially). Demand will shift competition to this new resource, but its supply is managed via a controlled, long-term fee adjustment mechanism.
Evidence: Post-4844 L2 fee structures. L2s like Base and zkSync Era will publish fee models where the user cost is a small, fixed data fee plus a minimal proof/execution fee, ending the era of gas price guessing games.
key-trends
PREDICTABILITY OVER CHAOS
Executive Summary: The Forecasting Shift
Proto-Danksharding (EIP-4844) fundamentally changes the calculus for L2 cost forecasting by decoupling data availability from execution.
01
The Problem: Unpredictable L2 Cost Spikes
Today, L2s like Arbitrum and Optimism post data to expensive Ethereum calldata, causing fees to spike 10-100x during network congestion. Forecasting is impossible.\n- Cost Volatility: Fees tied directly to Ethereum's volatile gas market.\n- Opaque Pricing: Users and dApps cannot predict transaction costs minutes in advance.
100x
Fee Spikes
Unpredictable
Forecast Horizon
02
The Solution: Blob-Carrying Transactions
EIP-4844 introduces a dedicated, low-cost data channel (blobs) with a separate fee market, creating a predictable cost floor for L2s.\n- Decoupled Markets: Blob gas is independent from execution gas, isolating L2 costs from mainnet activity.\n- Fixed Lifetime: Blobs are automatically pruned after ~18 days, enabling permanent low-cost data availability.
-90%
Data Cost
~18 days
Data Window
03
The New Forecast Model: Blob Gas Auctions
Cost forecasting shifts from predicting Ethereum's execution gas to modeling a new, simpler blob gas auction. This market is designed for stability.\n- Targeted Supply: Protocol targets ~3 blobs per block, creating predictable base capacity.\n- EIP-1559 Mechanics: Same burn-and-tip model, but for data, smoothing volatility for L2 sequencers like StarkNet and zkSync.
~3/blk
Target Capacity
Stable
Fee Curve
04
The Architectural Pivot: From Calldata to Blobs
L2s must upgrade their core transaction posting logic. This is a one-time architectural shift for permanent cost predictability.\n- Client Upgrades: All execution and consensus clients (Geth, Erigon, Teku) must support the new transaction type.\n- Sequencer Retooling: L2 sequencers will batch data into blobs, a more efficient format than raw calldata.
All Clients
Requires Upgrade
1x
Architectural Shift
05
The Endgame: A Truly Scalable Settlement Layer
Proto-Danksharding is the critical first step towards full Danksharding, positioning Ethereum as a scalable data availability layer for rollups.\n- Path to 16 MB: Today's ~0.375 MB blobs pave the way for 16 MB data shards.\n- L2 as Primary UX: Enables sub-cent transactions, making L2s like Base and Arbitrum viable for mass adoption.
16 MB
Future Capacity
<$0.01
Target L2 Tx Cost
06
The Risk: Blob Capacity Crunch
If demand exceeds the initial ~3 blob per block target, a new fee market emerges. Forecasting must model L2 adoption curves and blob gas demand.\n- New Congestion Vector: High demand for blob space could create its own premium pricing.\n- Inter-L2 Competition: Optimism, Arbitrum, and zkRollups will compete for the same low-cost data bandwidth.
>3/blk
Demand Risk
L2 vs L2
New Competition
market-context
THE COST UNCERTAINTY
The Pre-4844 Forecasting Nightmare
EIP-4844's variable blob fees shatter the deterministic cost models that L2s and dApps have relied on for years.
Blob fee volatility is the new core challenge. The EIP-1559-style fee market for blobs introduces a separate, unpredictable variable. This breaks the stable, predictable L2 fee models that protocols like Arbitrum and Optimism built their businesses on.
Forecasting is now multi-dimensional. Teams must now model base gas fees, priority fees, and blob fees. This creates a non-linear cost function where a surge in Celestia data availability or a spike in blobscriptions can unpredictably inflate L2 batch submission costs.
The old L2 subsidy model is broken. Rollups like zkSync Era previously subsidized fixed calldata costs. With blob prices fluctuating independently, their treasury management and sequencer economics require real-time hedging strategies to avoid insolvency during congestion events.
Evidence: Post-4844, the blob gas price has seen 100x swings within hours. An L2 like Base submitting a batch with 3 blobs paid ~0.001 ETH one minute and over 0.1 ETH the next, making cost prediction for end-users and the protocol itself impossible with old models.
deep-dive
THE COST MODEL
Blob Economics: Decoupling Execution from Data
Proto-danksharding introduces a separate fee market for data, creating predictable, non-competitive pricing for rollup data availability.
Separate fee markets are the core innovation. Blob-carrying transactions pay for data in a dedicated auction, decoupling this cost from the volatile gas fees for execution. This creates a stable cost basis for rollups like Arbitrum and Optimism.
Predictable pricing emerges because blob supply is elastic and demand is inelastic. Unlike execution gas, blob space is a pure commodity; validators simply attest to data, not compute it. This separates the economics of state growth from state transition.
The forecasting model is simple: cost per byte. Rollups like Base and zkSync now forecast data costs using blob count and target blob price, not a bidding war with defi traders. This is a fundamental shift from the L1 gas auction model.
Evidence: Post-EIP-4844, Arbitrum's data posting costs dropped ~90% and became predictable. The blob fee market's target price mechanism and independent burning create a stable, long-term cost curve for all L2s.
PROTO-DANKSHARDING IMPACT
Cost Model Comparison: Pre vs. Post EIP-4844
Quantifies the impact of blob-carrying transactions on Layer 2 cost structures and forecasting.
| Cost Component | Pre EIP-4844 (Calldata) | Post EIP-4844 (Blobs) | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
Primary Data Unit | Calldata (persistent) | Blob (ephemeral, ~18 days) | Ephemeral storage |
Cost per Byte (approx.) | 16 gas | 1 gas (blob base fee) | -93.75% |
L1 Data Cost for 125 KB Batch | $1,200 (est.) | $75 (est., target) | -94% |
Cost Volatility | High (tied to L1 gas auctions) | Low (separate blob fee market) | Decoupled market |
Forecastability | Poor (gas spikes unpredictable) | High (stable, target-driven pricing) | Dramatic improvement |
Throughput Limit | ~80 KB per block | ~1.8 MB per block (target 3 blobs) | 22.5x increase (target) |
Data Availability Guarantee | Full Ethereum consensus | Full Ethereum consensus | Unchanged security |
counter-argument
THE COST MODEL
The Limits of Predictability
Proto-danksharding introduces a new, volatile variable that breaks existing L2 cost forecasting models.
Blob pricing is volatile. The new blob fee market operates independently from EIP-1559's base fee, adding a second unpredictable variable to transaction cost calculations. This breaks the simple gas price models used by L2 sequencers like Arbitrum and Optimism for user fee estimation.
Forecasting requires new tooling. Existing dashboards like L2Fees and Dune Analytics must now track blob supply, demand from rollups, and the separate blob base fee. This is a fundamentally different data problem than monitoring standard block space.
Sequencer margins will compress. L2s currently batch transactions and pay a single Ethereum fee. With blob price volatility, the gap between the fee they charge users and the fee they pay to post data will become unpredictable, squeezing a core revenue stream.
Evidence: The blob fee has already seen 10x swings within single epochs post-EIP-4844, a volatility profile that standard gas prices do not exhibit. This forces protocols like StarkNet and zkSync to implement more complex hedging strategies.
takeaways
PROTO DANSHARDING
Actionable Insights for Builders
EIP-4844 introduces blob-carrying transactions, fundamentally changing how L2s post data to Ethereum. This is a new cost paradigm, not just a discount.
01
The Problem: Unpredictable L2 Cost Spikes
Today, L2 transaction fees are volatile because they compete with mainnet DeFi for calldata space. A single NFT mint can cause a 10-100x fee spike for all L2s.
- Cost Model: Fees = Execution Cost + (Calldata Cost * Data Size).
- Volatility Source: Calldata cost is a direct function of mainnet congestion.
100x
Fee Spikes
~90%
Calldata Cost
02
The Solution: Isolated Blob Market
Proto-Danksharding creates a separate fee market for data blobs, decoupling L2 data costs from mainnet execution. This enables stable, predictable data posting fees.
- New Cost Model: Fees = Execution Cost + (Blob Fee * Blob Count).
- Key Benefit: Blob gas target is independent, smoothing volatility. L2s can forecast costs based on blob supply, not Punks floor price.
~10x
Cheaper Data
-80%
Volatility
03
Build for Blob Expiry: The 18-Day Time Bomb
Blobs are pruned after ~18 days (4096 epochs). Your protocol's data availability strategy must evolve from 'store forever on L1' to 'sync state within the window'.
- Requirement: Implement a robust data availability committee (DAC) or decentralized storage fallback (e.g., Celestia, EigenDA, Arweave).
- Architecture Shift: This enables true modular stacks, separating execution from long-term data availability.
18 Days
Data Window
~1 MB
Per Blob
04
Arbitrum & Optimism: The First-Mover Advantage
Major L2s like Arbitrum and Optimism will immediately pass cost savings to users, making their rollups ~10x cheaper. Their sequencer economics improve dramatically.
- Competitive Edge: Cheaper fees directly translate to user growth and TVL.
- Builder Action: If you're not on a blob-optimized L2, you're overpaying for security. Evaluate chains by their post-4844 fee structure.
Sub-$0.01
Target Tx Cost
$10B+
Combined TVL
05
The New Bottleneck: Blob Throughput
Initial target is ~3 blobs/block (~0.375 MB/s). With 50+ L2s and alt-DA layers competing, blob space will be scarce. Fee auctions for blob space are inevitable.
- Forecasting Tip: Model costs based on blob slot utilization, not just base fee.
- Strategic Move: Consider EigenDA or Celestia for high-throughput applications to bypass this bottleneck entirely.
3/Block
Blob Target
~0.4 MB/s
Data Rate
06
zk-Rollups: The Asymmetric Winners
zkSync, Starknet, and Scroll gain more than Optimistic Rollups. Their validity proofs are smaller than fraud proof dispute windows, and they can batch more transactions per byte.
- Efficiency Multiplier: zk-proofs compress state diffs more efficiently than raw calldata.
- Architect for This: If building a new L2, the cost math now strongly favors ZK tech stacks for high-frequency applications.
>1000
TPS Potential
~90%
Cost Reduction
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall