Arbitrum Nitro excels at maximizing theoretical throughput by leveraging its unique multi-threaded sequencer architecture and fraud-proof system. This design allows it to process a high volume of transactions off-chain before submitting compressed batches to Ethereum. For example, during peak demand, Arbitrum One has demonstrated sustained periods of 40-100+ TPS, significantly higher than Ethereum's base layer, while maintaining sub-dollar transaction fees for users.
LABS
Comparisons
Arbitrum Nitro vs Optimism Bedrock: TPS
A technical comparison of throughput performance, architectural trade-offs, and cost implications between Arbitrum Nitro and Optimism Bedrock for engineering leaders.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction
A data-driven breakdown of how Arbitrum Nitro and Optimism Bedrock approach scalability, focusing on their TPS philosophies and real-world performance.
Optimism Bedrock takes a different approach by prioritizing EVM-equivalence and minimizing L1 data costs through its innovative data compression techniques. This strategy results in a trade-off: while its current single-threaded sequencer may have a lower peak TPS ceiling in benchmarks, its architecture is designed for long-term efficiency and seamless developer experience. The focus is on cost-effective scaling, with the Bedrock upgrade reducing L1 data costs by optimizing transaction data formatting.
The key trade-off: If your priority is raw throughput potential and handling sudden, massive transaction spikes (e.g., for a high-frequency DeFi protocol or NFT mint), Arbitrum Nitro's architecture is currently advantageous. If you prioritize maximizing cost-efficiency per transaction, achieving near-perfect EVM compatibility, and a roadmap focused on shared sequencing via the Superchain, then Optimism Bedrock presents a compelling case. Your choice hinges on whether peak capacity or optimized cost structure aligns with your application's traffic patterns.
tldr-summary
Arbitrum Nitro vs Optimism Bedrock: TPS
TL;DR: Key Differentiators
Comparing the transaction throughput and scalability approaches of the two leading Ethereum L2s. TPS is a function of architecture, data compression, and network activity.
01
Arbitrum Nitro: Higher Practical Throughput
Architectural Advantage: Nitro's unique AnyTrust mode (used by Nova) and aggressive data compression enable higher sustained TPS under load. Benchmarks show ~40,000 TPS in stress tests. This matters for high-frequency applications like gaming and social protocols.
40k+
Peak TPS (Testnet)
~7-10
Avg. TPS (Mainnet)
02
Arbitrum Nitro: Superior Data Compression
Cost Efficiency Drives Capacity: Nitro's custom compression (e.g., for L1 calldata) reduces batch sizes, allowing more transactions per batch posted to Ethereum. This directly increases potential TPS while lowering fees. Critical for protocols like GMX and Uniswap that batch thousands of swaps.
03
Optimism Bedrock: Consistent Baseline Performance
Optimistic Rollup Standard: Bedrock provides a predictable, high-throughput baseline with a simpler, more modular architecture. It achieves ~2,000 TPS in benchmarks. This matters for developers prioritizing stability, Ethereum equivalence, and the Superchain's shared security model (OP Stack).
2k+
Peak TPS (Testnet)
~4-6
Avg. TPS (Mainnet)
04
Optimism Bedrock: Future-Proof with Fault Proofs
Security Enables Scale: Bedrock's upcoming integration of Cannon fault proofs (on testnet) will decentralize security without compromising throughput. This modular approach allows TPS to scale with L1 data availability solutions (e.g., EigenDA). Essential for long-term, institutional-grade DeFi like Aave and Synthetix.
ARBITRUM NITRO VS OPTIMISM BEDROCK
Performance Specifications: TPS, Latency, Finality
Direct comparison of key performance metrics for the two leading Optimistic Rollup architectures.
| Metric | Arbitrum Nitro | Optimism Bedrock |
|---|---|---|
Peak TPS (Theoretical) | ~40,000 | ~2,000 |
Avg. Transaction Latency (L1 Confirmation) | ~5-10 min | ~12 min |
Time to Finality (Challenge Period) | ~7 days | ~7 days |
Avg. L2 Transaction Fee | $0.10 - $0.30 | $0.10 - $0.50 |
Data Compression (Batch Size) | True | True |
Fraud Proof System | Multi-round, interactive | Single-round, non-interactive |
EVM Compatibility | Arbitrum Virtual Machine (AVM) | EVM-Equivalent (OP Stack) |
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Arbitrum Nitro vs Optimism Bedrock: TPS & Cost Analysis
Direct comparison of throughput, cost, and key infrastructure metrics for two leading Optimistic Rollups.
| Metric | Arbitrum Nitro | Optimism Bedrock |
|---|---|---|
Peak Theoretical TPS | ~40,000 | ~2,000 |
Avg. L2 Transaction Cost (ETH Transfer) | $0.05 - $0.20 | $0.10 - $0.30 |
Avg. L2 Transaction Cost (Swap) | $0.15 - $0.50 | $0.25 - $0.70 |
Time to Finality (L1 Confirmation) | ~1 week (Dispute Period) | ~1 week (Dispute Period) |
Time to Soft Confirmation | ~5 minutes | ~2 minutes |
Fraud Proof System | Multi-round, interactive | Single-round, non-interactive |
Native EVM Equivalence | ||
Client Diversity | Nitro Geth (Custom) | OP Stack (Modified Geth) |
TPS & PERFORMANCE
Technical Deep Dive: Architecture & Bottlenecks
A technical comparison of Arbitrum Nitro and Optimism Bedrock's architectural approaches to transaction throughput, latency, and scalability bottlenecks for high-performance dApps.
Yes, Arbitrum Nitro generally achieves higher theoretical and practical TPS than Optimism Bedrock. Nitro's architecture, with its AnyTrust-based data availability and parallel execution, supports a theoretical peak of 40,000+ TPS, with sustained loads around 4,000-8,000 TPS. Optimism Bedrock, while significantly improved, typically processes 200-400 TPS in production, prioritizing deterministic state derivation and minimalism. The speed advantage for Nitro is most pronounced in high-volume, non-financial applications like gaming or social feeds.
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS FOR THROUGHPUT
Arbitrum Nitro vs Optimism Bedrock: TPS
A data-driven comparison of the two leading Optimistic Rollup architectures, focusing on transaction processing capabilities, scalability trade-offs, and real-world performance metrics.
01
Arbitrum Nitro: Higher Peak TPS
Specific advantage: Demonstrated capacity for ~40,000 TPS in stress tests, with sustained mainnet peaks exceeding 4,500 TPS. This is enabled by its multi-threaded sequencer and WASM-based fraud prover. This matters for protocols expecting bursty, high-volume traffic like NFT mints or gaming events.
40K+
Peak Test TPS
4.5K+
Sustained Mainnet TPS
02
Arbitrum Nitro: Lower L1 CallData Costs
Specific advantage: Uses a proprietary calldata compression technique, reducing the data posted to Ethereum L1 by up to ~60% compared to raw transactions. This matters for cost-sensitive dApps as it lowers the fixed overhead per transaction batch, improving economic scalability under high load.
~60%
Data Compression
03
Optimism Bedrock: Predictable L1-Derived Sequencing
Specific advantage: Employs a single-threaded, deterministic sequencer model derived from Geth. This provides extremely predictable performance and gas estimation, crucial for high-frequency DeFi protocols (like Perpetuals on Synthetix or Aave V3) where execution timing consistency is more critical than raw peak throughput.
~2K
Typical Mainnet TPS
04
Optimism Bedrock: Superior Interop via Fault Proofs
Specific advantage: Bedrock's fault proof system (Cannon) is designed for multi-client equivalence, allowing different client implementations. This matters for protocols prioritizing maximum security and censorship resistance, as it reduces systemic risk and enables trust-minimized bridging (e.g., Across Protocol).
pros-cons-b
Arbitrum Nitro vs Optimism Bedrock
Optimism Bedrock: Pros and Cons for Throughput
A data-driven breakdown of architectural choices impacting transaction processing speed and capacity. TPS is a function of fraud proof design, data compression, and client efficiency.
01
Arbitrum Nitro: Higher Peak TPS
Specific advantage: Leverages a custom WASM-based fraud prover (ArbOS) and aggressive state compression to achieve higher theoretical peaks. Benchmarks show sustained throughput of ~40,000 TPS on testnet under optimal conditions. This matters for protocols expecting sudden, massive user influxes like NFT mints or token launches.
~40K
Peak TPS (Testnet)
02
Arbitrum Nitro: Lower L1 Calldata Costs
Specific advantage: Employs a proprietary calldata compression algorithm (Brotli) to minimize data posted to Ethereum L1. This reduces the primary bottleneck and cost for high-throughput applications, allowing more transactions to be batched per L1 post. This matters for dApps with high transaction volumes where gas fees are a critical concern.
03
Optimism Bedrock: Predictable, Stable Throughput
Specific advantage: Uses a fault-proof system based on Cannon and a minimal, EVM-equivalent OP Stack client. This design prioritizes security and simplicity, delivering a consistent ~2,000 TPS in production. This matters for enterprise applications and DeFi protocols where predictable performance and auditability are more critical than peak throughput.
~2K
Sustained TPS (Mainnet)
04
Optimism Bedrock: Superior L1 Data Efficiency
Specific advantage: Implements EIP-4844 proto-danksharding (blobs) natively, reducing L1 data costs by ~90%+ compared to pre-blob calldata. While Nitro also uses blobs, Bedrock's architecture was designed from the ground up to optimize for this standard. This matters for long-term scalability and cost reduction as Ethereum's roadmap progresses.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
Arbitrum Nitro for DeFi
Verdict: The established leader for high-value, complex applications. Strengths: Dominant TVL (over $18B) and deep liquidity on DEXs like GMX and Camelot. The Nitro stack's WASM-based fraud prover and EVM+ compatibility make it ideal for sophisticated, battle-tested contracts requiring maximum security and network effects. Trade-off: Slightly higher average transaction fees than Optimism, but justified for capital-intensive operations.
Optimism Bedrock for DeFi
Verdict: A lean, cost-effective challenger for high-frequency, lower-value transactions. Strengths: Bedrock's modular architecture and fault-proof system deliver lower and more predictable fees. Its Superchain vision with OP Stack offers a clear path for interoperability. Excellent for protocols like Synthetix and Velodrome that prioritize cost efficiency and composability across a future rollup ecosystem. Trade-off: Smaller TVL and less entrenched liquidity than Arbitrum's ecosystem.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Verdict and Final Recommendation
A final breakdown of the TPS trade-offs between Arbitrum Nitro and Optimism Bedrock to guide your infrastructure choice.
Arbitrum Nitro excels at delivering a higher theoretical and sustained transaction throughput. Its key innovation is the Nitro Stack, which compresses transaction data before submitting it to Ethereum L1, allowing more transactions per calldata byte. This architecture, combined with its AnyTrust security model, supports a consistent ~40,000 TPS in its test environment, with mainnet regularly handling bursts far exceeding Ethereum's base layer. For high-frequency applications like GMX or TreasureDAO, this capacity is critical for maintaining low latency during peak demand.
Optimism Bedrock takes a different approach by prioritizing EVM equivalence and minimizing L1 data costs through its batch compression and data availability strategies. While its current TPS ceiling is lower than Arbitrum's in practice, its design is a foundational step towards the Superchain vision. The trade-off is that raw throughput is sometimes secondary to achieving perfect compatibility and shared security across a rollup ecosystem. Protocols like Synthetix and Aave value this long-term interoperability over peak TPS metrics.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing throughput and minimizing latency for user-facing dApps today, choose Arbitrum Nitro. Its proven capacity handles DeFi and gaming surges effectively. If you prioritize deep Ethereum compatibility and are building for a multi-chain future within the OP Stack ecosystem, choose Optimism Bedrock. Its TPS will scale with Bedrock upgrades and the collective security of the Superchain.
ENQUIRY
Build the
future.
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