1

I created safe 4337 accounts on both arbitrum and optimism and surprised by the difference in gas usage.

Arbitrum transaction: https://arbiscan.io/tx/0x806f0c57f7d82a90bc3dfb31d943ec7a26f7be9b9e1868d0aadca46f56ecd667

Optimism transaction: https://optimistic.etherscan.io/tx/0x2a48898ad7432aae42a9137a1424d33fa3830c7a6cbfc5d6f04a129a571752fb

As you can see in the details, both consume practically the same amount of gas on L2 (~404K) but there is a huge difference in the L1 gas used by both (14k for optimism vs 460k for arbitrum).

There is ofcourse a difference of gas price on the two networks which I can understand. Ultimately, similar transaction on arbitrum is costing 3-4x compared to similar one on optimism.

Can anyone explain why arbitrum transaction is consuming so much more L1 gas? Is this dependent on specific network conditions (like how many transactions are getting rolled-up in both etc..) or will this always be the disparity I can expect?

3
  • We're having issues finding where the L1 consumption estimation comes from (the 460k). Could you precise the question so we can make sure we compare the correct numbers? Thanks in advance 🙏 Commented May 31 at 9:59
  • For the arbitrum transaction linked above, if you go to the "Advanced TxInfo" tab on the explorer, you'll see the poster fee (L1) and network fee(L2) being reported. Optimism shows this information on the main page when you click to see "more details". Total fees paid is the sum of these two components. Commented Jun 1 at 15:13
  • Ok thanks for the precision. It does not appear to be directly related to safe, but more a network-specific issue. It probably comes from different network configurations between Arbitrum and Optimism, each having specific trade-offs that could impact gas price on L1. Commented Jun 4 at 10:14

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.