EIP-7976 Empirical Report

The following represents a summary with empirical findings from analyzing EIP-7976’s impact on transactions. Date: November, 2025

Dataset

  • Period: 150 days of Ethereum mainnet data (June-November 2025)
  • Blocks analyzed: 1,080,000 blocks
  • Total transactions: 223,626,649

Overall Impact Metrics

Transaction Impact Summary

Metric Value
Total unaffected transactions 220,322,233 (98.52%)
Total affected transactions 3,304,416 (1.48%)
Transactions already affected by EIP-7623 2,808,580 (1.26%)
New transactions affected by EIP-7976 only 495,836 (0.22%)
EIP-7623 overlap percentage 85.0%

Address Distribution

Metric Value
Unique unaffected senders 30,849,352 (98.4%)
Unique affected senders 503,397 (1.6%)
Unique affected recipients 711,303 (3.4%)
Avg transactions per affected sender 6.56
Avg transactions per affected recipient 4.65

Gas Usage Analysis (Affected Transactions)

Basic Gas Metrics

Metric Value
Mean gas used 86,968
Median gas used 22,280
Average calldata bytes 2,271
Average zero bytes 889
Average non-zero bytes 1,382

Most Affected Senders

Top 30 Senders by Additional Cost Impact

Rank Address Transactions Total Cost Increase (gas) Avg Cost/Tx Etherscan Link
1 0xe08cdadd44440e32ef153956a7ec40804a32dd74 1,941 9,617,746,280 4,955,047 View
2 0x54b839d988c9e712cd36cbf7c95dedc2b9f9ae6c 21,616 9,347,719,424 432,444 View
3 0xcbe6fbf5e3c427013688e04d0fde56705890c4be 17,110 8,648,757,461 505,479 View
4 0x148ee7daf16574cd020afa34cc658f8f3fbd2800 6,757 5,722,544,035 846,906 View
5 0xfe325f97146124f3767bfa59899fa4177fd46d2f 20,453 4,254,261,084 208,001 View
6 0x7804405f18e134c3c47d71ae02eb454d25722d88 699 3,176,420,025 4,544,234 View
7 0xe2da046340e00264c4f0443243a0565007ae08ac 5,311 3,168,185,085 596,532 View
8 0x7835fb36a8143a014a2c381363cd1a4dee586d2a 2,413 3,010,568,114 1,247,645 View
9 0xed9b8f05224b881a222ece2e20bd2f4bdb71d0f8 1,859 2,395,235,905 1,288,453 View
10 0xf2099c4783921f44ac988b67e743daefd4a00efd 1,131 2,164,837,191 1,914,091 View
11 0x570c531810ce02feb5eb2a9e1a2405464c82a7ec 1,414 2,050,545,330 1,450,173 View
12 0xb947d63b578fb48233de4076407dd0498dcf36ab 608 2,034,689,485 3,346,528 View
13 0xf6309d5a91fa559cbf8f6ff3c5ec8fb67fe38577 702 1,848,495,220 2,633,184 View
14 0x980c1999f4e0878c4910d4a1de2123ef040be07b 832 1,785,823,230 2,146,422 View
15 0x3f773dc3ccc70b3d2a549713ac8d556af949d4e8 974 1,713,010,497 1,758,737 View
16 0x89b2c022a08aa8c849c30d5e72e147932b76b628 723 1,455,357,225 2,012,942 View
17 0x8934c6bfe73e8b43c78459744d7c373eedb10876 409 1,403,884,590 3,432,480 View
18 0x9a05d4bc192ba1c73b47011652adaded3add8308 623 1,351,546,475 2,169,416 View
19 0x2c3b6e74be767cd9722cdf4a4ca08c6910012b0a 311 1,301,603,445 4,185,220 View
20 0xf6624e1a9cb8143091fa6916fa56c1cf3bb1be64 404 1,152,839,500 2,853,563 View
21 0x8595753b4cbffba64cb2e8d167fd25a2d448b5fa 422 892,776,365 2,115,583 View
22 0xf3d021d51a725f5dbdce253248e826a8644be3c1 3,168 829,432,199 261,815 View
23 0x62815399f1bc394445ef9a47daed86b9061d9641 4,367 792,030,012 181,367 View
24 0xf70da97812cb96acdf810712aa562db8dfa3dbef 1,140,536 790,076,999 692 View
25 0x0cad34b170a8e80b60f272d5ea9393f1b4cb7892 237 778,113,180 3,283,177 View
26 0x4cae788442670a46fd371850b0727224fcd63799 245 750,445,410 3,063,042 View
27 0x3b17facdd5e8be0029a68e10743b4cf24f37d030 78 666,051,985 8,539,128 View
28 0x30c2f77eaa93aace5e56ea4dcba5f21f794b58be 183 605,419,645 3,308,304 View
29 0xdfd3f1f53e8da33fff6851e7908ef472496d738a 227 529,185,625 2,331,214 View
30 0x09b96417602ed6ac76651f7a8c4860e60e3aa6d0 46,490 484,677,580 10,425 View

Key Observations

  • Top single address (0xe08cdadd44440e32ef153956a7ec40804a32dd74) accounts for 9.6% of all additional costs with only 1,941 transactions
  • Highest volume address (0xf70da97812cb96acdf810712aa562db8dfa3dbef) has 1,140,536 affected transactions but only 692 gas average increase per transaction
  • Highest per-transaction impact (0x3b17facdd5e8be0029a68e10743b4cf24f37d030) shows 8.5M gas average increase per transaction

Cost Impact

Metric Value
Mean cost increase per transaction 30,287.65 gas units
Median cost increase per transaction 640 gas units

Address Concentration Analysis

Transaction Distribution

Address Group Count Percentage
1 affected transaction 293,132 58.23%
≤10 affected transactions 492,333 97.80%
≤50 affected transactions 502,047 99.73%
≤100 affected transactions 502,640 99.85%
≤200 affected transactions 502,894 99.90%
≤400 affected transactions 503,041 99.93%

Transaction Volume Concentration

Top Addresses % of Affected Transactions
Top 10 42.40%
Top 20 46.89%
Top 30 49.18%
Top 40 50.87%
Top 50 52.08%

Transaction Volume by Percentiles

Address Percentile % of Affected Transactions
Top 10% 53.17%
Top 20% 56.65%
Top 30% 58.52%
Top 40% 59.94%
Top 50% 61.03%

Cost Impact Concentration

Top Addresses % of Additional Costs
Top 10 51.46%
Top 20 67.55%
Top 30 74.66%
Top 40 78.46%
Top 50 81.25%

Cost Impact by Percentiles

Address Percentile % of Additional Costs
Top 1% 96.99%
Top 10% 98.98%
Top 20% 99.59%
Top 30% 99.81%
Top 40% 99.91%
Top 50% 99.95%

Method Analysis

Top 20 Affected Function Selectors

Rank Function Selector Transactions Total Cost Increase Avg Cost/Tx Method Name
1 0x5578ceae 25,178 11,105,139,785 441,065 registerContinuousMemoryPage(…)
2 0x538f9406 22,333 9,463,956,180 423,766 updateState(uint256[],uint256[])
3 0xf074ba62 5,416 7,851,409,934 1,449,669 verifyCheckpointProofs(…)
4 0x46fa01fa 2,714 7,039,378,930 2,593,645 Unknown
5 0xb910e0f9 6,757 5,722,544,035 847,133 Unknown
6 0x2217b211 5,348 3,177,136,180 594,095 Unknown
7 0xc1bceb8c 1,849 2,357,236,963 1,274,873 Unknown
8 0xe85a6a28 12,971 1,862,516,315 143,591 verifyFRI(…)
9 0x46fa040c 296 1,570,922,320 5,307,844 Unknown
10 0x46fa03a0 277 1,316,313,155 4,752,738 Unknown
11 0x46fa01f4 423 1,081,763,690 2,557,536 Unknown
12 0x46fa026d 334 1,062,924,940 3,182,410 Unknown
13 0x46fa01f0 410 1,041,783,285 2,541,179 Unknown
14 0x6fadcf72 56,605 1,014,588,648 17,924 forward(address,bytes)
15 0x623b223d 4,213 924,216,060 219,423 Unknown
16 0x46fa030d 221 884,022,100 4,000,100 Unknown
17 0x3fe317a6 5,559 827,995,875 148,925 verifyMerkle(…)
18 0x46fa018f 396 817,798,600 2,065,147 Unknown
19 0x46fa0e3d 43 802,503,595 18,662,874 Unknown
20 0x46fa06b8 90 792,783,660 8,808,707 Unknown

Key Methods by Category

Zero-Knowledge Proof Systems

  • registerContinuousMemoryPage: 25,178 txs, avg 441,065 gas increase
  • updateState: 22,333 txs, avg 423,766 gas increase
  • verifyCheckpointProofs: 5,416 txs, avg 1,449,669 gas increase
  • verifyFRI: 12,971 txs, avg 143,591 gas increase
  • verifyMerkle: 5,559 txs, avg 148,925 gas increase

Multi-signature/Proxy Operations

  • forward: 56,605 txs, avg 17,924 gas increase

EIP-7623 Interaction Analysis

Linear Cost Increase

The analysis reveals that 85.0% of transactions affected by EIP-7976 are already impacted by EIP-7623. This means:

  • 2,808,580 transactions (1.26% of all transactions) will experience linear cost increases as calldata pricing moves from EIP-7623 rates to EIP-7976 rates
  • 495,836 transactions (0.22% of all transactions) represent new impact from EIP-7976

Pricing Structure Comparison

Byte Type Current EIP-7623 EIP-7976 7623→7976 Increase
Zero bytes 4 gas 10 gas 15 gas +5 gas (50%)
Non-zero bytes 16 gas 40 gas 60 gas +20 gas (50%)

Key Findings

  1. High Concentration: Cost impact is extremely concentrated with top 1% of addresses responsible for 96.99% of additional costs

  2. EIP-7623 Linear Escalation: Most affected transactions (85.0%) will see linear cost increases from existing EIP-7623 pricing

  3. Address Distribution: 58.23% of affected addresses have only 1 affected transaction, indicating diverse but minimal user impact

  4. Methods: Impact is dominated by zero-knowledge proof operations, with additional impact from multi-signature/proxy operations

  5. Cost Variance: Median increase (640 gas) vs mean increase (30,287.65 gas) shows high variance in impact severity