Questioning narratives, understanding narratives, and becoming part of narratives are the classic three steps in crypto hype. However, the genesis of a narrative often stems from some highfalutin words, such as “intent,” “modularization,” “parallelization”… They sound concise and powerful, leaving people seemingly understanding but not really. That’s the allure of these sexy technical terms.

But if you were to ask where these words originated from, top VC Paradigm must be worthy of the title “neologism master.” Last July, Paradigm introduced the ten trends they were focusing on, among which was the concept of “intent-centric.”

As a result, the concept of intent quickly gained popularity, and projects began flocking to the buzzword. The simple appeal of “making user experience better” could be beautifully packaged with just the word “intent.” The XX protocol based on intent became a necessary footnote in new projects’ Twitter bios.

Recently, the neologism master Paradigm struck again, with its CTO publishing an article titled “Reth’s path to 1 gigagas per second, and Beyond.” Naturally, the key term in the article is “gigagas.”

“Giga” directly translates to the common quantity unit, which is billion or gigabyte, while “gas” is obviously the well-known gas fee. But when these two words combine - a billion gas? Hmm, it still gives that familiar feeling of being concise yet powerful, succinct yet profound, seemingly understanding yet not quite, and impressively mysterious.

From TPS to GPS, the neologism master’s new standard

In fact, Paradigm’s newly proposed gigagas is related to blockchain performance. In conventional thinking, when we talk about whether a blockchain is fast or not, we typically use TPS (transactions per second) as a measure, i.e., the number of transactions that can be processed per second.

However, Paradigm’s CTO believes that “Gas Per Second” (GPS), which measures “Gas consumed per second,” is a more accurate metric. This is because:

Measurement of computational workload: Gas is the unit used to measure the computational workload required to execute operations (such as transactions or smart contracts). Therefore, GPS can more accurately reflect the network’s computational capacity per second.

Representation of capacity and efficiency: Adopting GPS as a performance indicator can provide a clearer understanding of the blockchain’s capacity and efficiency, aiding in evaluating system costs.

Deterrence against DOS attacks: Standardizing performance metrics to GPS can better mitigate potential Denial of Service (DOS) attacks, which may exploit less accurate metrics.

Cross-chain performance comparison: Using GPS helps compare the performance of different EVM-compatible chains, as different chains may have different computational complexities in transaction processing.

Therefore, using GPS instead of TPS to measure blockchain performance would be better, and Paradigm suggests that the EVM community adopt gas consumption per second as a standard metric, while combining other gas pricing dimensions to create a comprehensive performance standard.

Following Paradigm’s approach, if we evaluate EVM network performance comprehensively based on gas consumption per second while capturing computation and storage costs, then the rankings of mainstream L1 and L2 networks based on GPS should be as follows:

*Editor’s note: In the table, the data in mg refers to milligas, which is “one thousandth of a gas.” The larger the value, the greater the computational capacity per second of the blockchain network, indicating better performance. According to the data in the table, opBNB is the highest among all the networks listed.

This means that compared to other blockchain networks, opBNB can execute more computations within a unit of time, processing more or more complex transactions and smart contracts. However, the evaluation of performance should also consider other factors such as network security, decentralization, and fee structure.

1 gigagas, VCs are rolling up their sleeves

However, Paradigm’s ambitions go far beyond the numbers in the table; they aim to achieve 1 gigagas for GPS, meaning that the blockchain can consume 1 billion units of gas per second.

As early as a few years ago, Paradigm began developing Reth using Rust, an Ethereum execution client. Reth’s goal is to optimize execution performance and increase the number of gas units processed per second, thereby enhancing the overall performance of the Ethereum network.

According to publicly available data from the article, Reth has already achieved a throughput of 100-200MB gas per second (including sender recovery, transaction execution, and computing each block’s trie). Therefore, achieving the goal of 1 Gigagas per second would require a further tenfold increase.

Paradigm’s solution is to vertically and horizontally scale the Reth they have developed. As for the specific details of scaling, they are too technical for the average reader. Here, we have simplified the explanation for a quick understanding of the situation.

Vertical scaling, also known as scaling up, is akin to giving a machine a more powerful engine or adding more memory to it to enable it to handle more workload. The main purpose is to increase the processing capacity of existing individual servers or nodes.

Paradigm has come up with specific methods such as:

JIT / AOT EVM: By using Just-In-Time (JIT) or Ahead-Of-Time (AOT) compilation for EVM, the overhead of the EVM interpreter is reduced, thereby speeding up the processing of single-threaded transactions. It is claimed that this can halve the execution time.


Parallel EVM: Utilizing multi-core processors to execute EVM allows for the simultaneous processing of more transactions. This is because historically, up to 80% of EVM transactions have no interdependent relationships and can be executed in parallel.


Parallel, pipelined, modified state roots: Reducing the overhead of calculating state roots. State root calculation accounts for the majority of block production time, exceeding 75%. Therefore, optimizing this aspect significantly improves efficiency.

Horizontal scaling, on the other hand, involves adding more processing units to the system, much like adding more production lines in a large factory. By adding more processing units to share the workload, the overall capacity of the system can be expanded without increasing the pressure on individual nodes.

Specific methods that Paradigm has considered include:

• Multiple Rollup Reth: Reducing the operational overhead of running multiple rollups, meaning that multiple rollups can be initiated within the same process, thereby minimizing the operational costs of running thousands of rollups.
• Cloud-Native Reth: By distributing tasks across multiple machines, capacity is expanded. This is similar to cloud computing architecture, allowing the system to automatically scale as needed and using cloud object storage to persist data.

If you don’t understand these methods, it’s okay. What we need to understand is that:

Paradigm has developed its own Ethereum client, proposed a new standard for measuring EVM performance, and aims to raise this new standard (GPS) to 1 gigagas through various means.

VC leads the way in infrastructure construction and performance enhancement, ultimately achieving much faster execution efficiency than existing Ethereum and other EVM-based public chains, allowing the blockchain to consume more gas per unit of time and execute more tasks, paving the way for the chain to support large-scale applications.

From this, we can also see that Paradigm not only invests money to let others develop L1/L2 solutions but also invests resources in performance development themselves. By investing in multiple areas, they contribute to improving infrastructure.

The creation of new terms never stops, but acquiring customers has yet to begin.

Clearly, “gigagas” is a more hardcore concept, not as accessible as “intent” where anyone can jump in. Perhaps in the future, various L1/L2 chains will demonstrate their performance capabilities reaching 1 gigagas or even more, but projects at the application layer may not be directly related to this term. However, in the current narrative vacuum, having one more concept adds another possibility of grabbing attention.

Professor Pan also keenly points out that creating crypto terms requires readability, understandability, and originality. From this perspective, “gigagas” meets several conditions and indeed appears novel at first glance. However, with so many L1/L2 solutions and new stories and concepts about performance emerging, where are the standout applications? Is it a matter of infrastructure being robust enough, and applications will eventually emerge? Should everyone focus on building infrastructure first?

In the author’s view, the importance of gigagas may not be as significant as “gigauser” (one billion users). Perhaps performance is a prerequisite for achieving user scale, but performance doesn’t necessarily guarantee users. The real challenge lies in tangible experience improvements and user inflow for crypto products, which still have a long way to go.

Disclaimer：

1. This article is reprinted from [TechFlow], All copyrights belong to the original author [TechFlow]. If there are objections to this reprint, please contact the Gate Learn team, and they will handle it promptly.
2. Liability Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not constitute any investment advice.
3. Translations of the article into other languages are done by the Gate Learn team. Unless mentioned, copying, distributing, or plagiarizing the translated articles is prohibited.