Ethereum Data Blobs (EIP-4844) excel at providing maximal security and seamless composability by leveraging Ethereum's existing validator set. For example, rollups like Arbitrum and Optimism have seen blob fees as low as $0.01 per transaction, a 100x reduction from previous calldata costs. This approach ensures rollups inherit Ethereum's battle-tested security model and can trustlessly communicate with the L1 and other L2s via native bridges and shared state.
LABS
Comparisons
Data Blobs (EIP-4844) vs Data Availability Sampling (Celestia)
A technical analysis comparing Ethereum's integrated blob-carrying transactions with Celestia's modular, sampling-based data availability layer for rollup scalability.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Core DA Dilemma for Rollups
Choosing a data availability layer is the foundational decision for any rollup, defining its cost, security, and future scalability.
Celestia's Data Availability Sampling (DAS) takes a different approach by decoupling consensus and execution, creating a modular, purpose-built DA layer. This results in a trade-off: it offers higher theoretical scalability—supporting hundreds of MB per block—and lower fixed costs, but introduces a new security assumption (honest majority of light nodes) and more complex cross-chain bridging. Protocols like Dymension and Eclipse leverage this for ultra-low-cost blockspace.
The key trade-off: If your priority is security maximalism and deep Ethereum ecosystem integration, choose Ethereum Blobs. If you prioritize minimizing long-term data costs and require sovereignty for your execution environment, choose Celestia. The former is the conservative, integrated path; the latter is the modular, scalability-focused alternative.
tldr-summary
Data Blobs (EIP-4844) vs Data Availability Sampling (Celestia)
TL;DR: Key Differentiators at a Glance
A direct comparison of Ethereum's integrated scaling solution versus a modular DA layer.
01
EIP-4844 Blobs: Native Ethereum Integration
Key advantage: Inherits Ethereum's full security and finality. Blobs are posted directly to the Beacon Chain, secured by the full validator set. This matters for L2 rollups (Arbitrum, Optimism, zkSync) that prioritize maximum security and seamless composability with the mainnet ecosystem.
~$100B+
Secured by ETH Staked
~0.003 ETH
Avg. Blob Fee
02
EIP-4844 Blobs: Cost & Throughput
Key advantage: Dramatically reduces L2 transaction fees. Blobs provide ~0.375 MB per block of dedicated, low-cost data space, decongesting calldata. This matters for high-volume dApps seeking predictable, low-cost settlement for end-users, though capacity is ultimately limited by Ethereum block space.
03
Celestia DAS: Modular Scalability
Key advantage: Horizontally scalable data availability via Data Availability Sampling (DAS). Light nodes can verify data availability without downloading entire blocks, enabling high-throughput rollups (Eclipse, Dymension) and sovereign chains to scale independently of any execution layer's constraints.
100+ MB/s
Theoretical DA Throughput
04
Celestia DAS: Flexibility & Sovereignty
Key advantage: Enables sovereign rollups and app-chains with full autonomy. Developers choose their own execution, settlement, and governance while using Celestia for secure DA. This matters for new L1s, gaming chains, or experimental VMs (like Fuel VM) that need a customizable, high-performance stack without Ethereum's consensus rules.
05
Choose EIP-4844 Blobs If...
Your priority is maximum security and ecosystem integration. Ideal for:
- General-purpose L2s (Arbitrum, Base)
- DeFi protocols requiring strong finality guarantees
- Projects where trust-minimized bridging to Ethereum L1 is non-negotiable.
06
Choose Celestia DAS If...
Your priority is scalability, low cost, and chain sovereignty. Ideal for:
- High-throughput app-specific rollups
- Experimental or niche execution environments
- Teams building modular stack with a custom settlement layer (like Rollkit).
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Data Blobs (EIP-4844) vs Data Availability Sampling (Celestia)
Direct comparison of data availability solutions for scaling Ethereum L2s and modular blockchains.
| Metric / Feature | Data Blobs (EIP-4844) | Data Availability Sampling (Celestia) |
|---|---|---|
Primary Architecture | In-protocol scaling (Ethereum L1) | Modular DA layer (Separate chain) |
Data Cost per MB (Est.) | ~$0.03 - $0.10 | < $0.001 |
Throughput (Data per Block) | ~0.75 MB (6 blobs) | ~8 MB |
Settlement & Security Provider | Ethereum (Inherited) | Celestia (Sovereign) |
Requires Consensus Participation | ||
Native Interoperability | Ethereum L2s (Arbitrum, Optimism) | Rollups (Dymension, Eclipse) |
Mainnet Launch | March 2024 (Dencun) | October 2023 |
pros-cons-a
Ethereum Blobs vs. Celestia DAS
Pros and Cons: Ethereum Data Blobs (EIP-4844)
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for data availability solutions.
01
Ethereum Blobs: Native Security
Inherits Ethereum's full security: Data is secured by the same ~$500B+ staked ETH securing the L1. This eliminates cross-chain trust assumptions, making it the gold standard for L2 rollups like Arbitrum, Optimism, and Base. Essential for high-value financial applications.
02
Ethereum Blobs: Integrated Ecosystem
Seamless developer experience: Builders use familiar tools (Ethers.js, Foundry) and wallets (MetaMask). Settlement and data availability are unified, simplifying architecture. This matters for teams prioritizing developer velocity and leveraging existing Ethereum tooling.
03
Celestia DAS: Scalable & Cost-Effective
Designed for high-throughput data: Uses Data Availability Sampling (DAS) to scale bandwidth independently of consensus. This enables ~100 MB/s data availability, keeping costs low and predictable (e.g., <$0.01 per MB). Ideal for high-frequency apps or new L2/L3 chains.
04
Celestia DAS: Modular Flexibility
Decouples execution, settlement, and data: Chains can use Celestia for data while choosing their own settlement layer (e.g., Arbitrum Orbit, Optimism Stack). This matters for sovereign rollups and projects needing maximum customization, like Eclipse or dYmension.
05
Ethereum Blobs: Limited Throughput
Capacity is constrained by L1 consensus: Currently targets ~0.375 MB per block. During peak demand, blob fees can spike, creating cost uncertainty. This is a trade-off for projects requiring extremely high, consistent data volumes.
06
Celestia DAS: Younger Security Model
Smaller, independent validator set: While secure, its ~$1B+ staked TIA does not match Ethereum's economic depth. This introduces a modular trust assumption that may be unsuitable for protocols managing tens of billions in TVL from day one.
pros-cons-b
A Technical Breakdown
Pros and Cons: Data Blobs vs. Data Availability Sampling
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for CTOs choosing a data availability layer.
01
EIP-4844 Data Blobs: Pros
Native Ethereum Integration: Blobs are a core part of Ethereum's execution layer, providing seamless composability with L2s like Arbitrum, Optimism, and Base. This matters for teams prioritizing security inheritance from Ethereum's validator set and avoiding additional trust assumptions.
Immediate Ecosystem Leverage: Leverages Ethereum's existing 18M+ validator set and tooling (Etherscan, Beacon Chain explorers). Rollups can adopt blobs without changing their security model, crucial for established protocols like zkSync Era or Starknet.
02
EIP-4844 Data Blobs: Cons
Limited Throughput & Cost: Blob capacity is capped (currently ~3-6 blobs/block, ~0.375 MB). During congestion, blob gas fees can spike, making data posting expensive for high-throughput chains. This matters for applications requiring sustained, cheap data (e.g., high-frequency gaming or social feeds).
Fixed Data Window: Blobs are only stored for ~18 days (4096 epochs), after which nodes prune them. This requires L2s to implement their own long-term data availability committees or alternative storage, adding complexity versus permanent availability guarantees.
03
Celestia DAS: Pros
Horizontally Scalable Throughput: Celestia's data availability sampling (DAS) allows light nodes to securely verify data availability without downloading full blocks. This enables linear scalability with node count (10-100 MB/s today). This matters for appchains or rollups needing guaranteed, low-cost data posting at scale, like dYdX Chain or Eclipse rollups.
Modular Design Freedom: Celestia is sovereign and execution-agnostic. Teams can build rollups with any VM (CosmWasm, SVM, EVM) and settle to any chain. This is critical for protocol architects designing novel systems outside the EVM ecosystem.
04
Celestia DAS: Cons
Newer Security & Economic Model: Relies on its own $2B+ staked validator set, separate from Ethereum. While proven in production, it lacks Ethereum's ~8-year battle-testing. This matters for ultra-conservative DeFi protocols (e.g., MakerDAO, Aave) where security is paramount.
Ecosystem Fragmentation: Data posted to Celestia isn't natively readable by Ethereum L1 contracts without a bridge. This can complicate cross-chain messaging and proofs for protocols like LayerZero or Axelar, adding latency and trust layers for Ethereum-centric applications.
DATA AVAILABILITY LAYERS
Technical Deep Dive: How They Work
EIP-4844's data blobs and Celestia's Data Availability Sampling (DAS) represent two distinct architectural approaches to scaling data availability. This section breaks down the core technical differences to help you choose the right foundation for your rollup.
EIP-4844 blobs are a temporary data storage layer on Ethereum, while Celestia DAS is a dedicated, modular data availability network. Blobs provide cheaper, short-term data posting for Ethereum L2s, leveraging Ethereum's consensus for security. Celestia is a separate blockchain built solely for data availability, using light clients and sampling to verify data is available without downloading it all, enabling sovereign rollups.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
Data Blobs (EIP-4844) for Architects
Verdict: The pragmatic, incremental upgrade for Ethereum-centric rollups. Strengths: Seamless integration with Ethereum's security and tooling (e.g., EigenDA, Arbitrum, Optimism). No new trust assumptions. Leverages the existing validator set and client diversity. Ideal for protocols where Ethereum alignment is a non-negotiable requirement for user and investor confidence. Trade-off: Throughput is ultimately capped by Ethereum's consensus layer upgrades. You're buying into Ethereum's roadmap (e.g., danksharding).
Data Availability Sampling (Celestia) for Architects
Verdict: The modular foundation for sovereign rollups and high-throughput app-chains. Strengths: Enables sovereignty—you control your chain's execution and settlement. Provides scalable, plug-and-play DA with light-client security via Data Availability Sampling. Lower cost basis is predictable and independent of Ethereum mainnet congestion. Perfect for building a new ecosystem (e.g., Dymension, Caldera) or a chain requiring maximal throughput. Trade-off: Introduces a new, albeit minimal, trust layer outside of Ethereum. Requires bridging assets for security.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
Choosing between Data Blobs and Data Availability Sampling is a foundational decision between integrated security and modular sovereignty.
EIP-4844 Data Blobs (Proto-Danksharding) excel at providing a secure, low-cost data availability layer for Ethereum L2s like Arbitrum and Optimism, leveraging the full security of the Ethereum consensus. For example, blob fees have consistently remained below $0.01 per transaction, offering a >100x cost reduction for rollups compared to calldata. This integrated approach minimizes trust assumptions and simplifies the security model for developers building within the Ethereum ecosystem.
Celestia's Data Availability Sampling (DAS) takes a different approach by decoupling consensus and execution into a modular stack. This results in a trade-off: it achieves higher theoretical scalability (targeting 100+ MB per block) and sovereignty for rollups like Eclipse and Dymension, but introduces a new, albeit minimal, trust assumption in the Celestia validator set. Its architecture is purpose-built for DA, enabling faster innovation and specialized chains.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing security inheritance from Ethereum and operating within its established L2 tooling (e.g., EigenDA, Arbitrum Orbit), choose EIP-4844 Data Blobs. If you prioritize sovereignty, higher throughput ceilings, and lower fixed costs for a dedicated appchain, choose Celestia's DAS. The decision ultimately hinges on whether you value Ethereum's monolithic security premium or the flexibility of a modular, specialized data availability layer.
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