The ZK Conclusion of Ethereum: Reshaping L1, Reconstructing L2

For those who are interested in the development of Ethereum technology, the recent blog post "Delivering L1 zkEVM #1: Real-Time Proof" by Ethereum engineer Sophia Gold is of significant importance. Although this only represents the technical vision of the Ethereum core development team and has not yet officially entered the EIP process, there is still a long way to go before it becomes an established proposal for mainnet upgrades, the signal it releases should not be underestimated.

This article clearly presents the core development blueprint for the future of Ethereum: fully and deeply integrating zero-knowledge proof technology into various layers of the Layer 1 protocol, achieving comprehensive coverage from the consensus layer to the execution layer. According to this technical roadmap, the first key step is to upgrade the EVM of each node to zkEVM. This way, when nodes execute transactions and run smart contracts, they can synchronously generate the corresponding zero-knowledge proofs, providing validation nodes with the basis for verifying the correctness of this execution.

This is not a routine technological iteration, but an architectural revolution comparable to "The Merge." It aims to fundamentally address the multiple challenges that Ethereum faces in terms of scalability, security, and economic models. So, why has Ethereum chosen to "go all in" on ZK at this moment? What deep logic lies behind this strategic shift? How will it reshape the L1 we know and the entire L2 ecosystem?

This article will narrate the grand narrative of Ethereum's "ZK Endgame" based on existing research, and analyze the motivations, actions, and far-reaching impacts behind it.

1. The paradigm shift from "Re-execution" to "Proof Verification"

The ZK (Zero Knowledge) transformation concept of Ethereum is fundamentally about a paradigm shift in the consensus verification mechanism. The recently released L1 zkEVM roadmap provides a clear technical path for this transition.

Current model: Re-execution Currently, when a new block is proposed, all validator nodes in the network must independently and completely re-execute every transaction within that block to compute and verify whether the final state root is consistent with what the proposer has declared. This process is resource-intensive and is the main bottleneck limiting Ethereum L1 throughput.

Future Model: Proof Verification Under the new L1 zkEVM architecture, the block builder generates a concise ZK validity proof while creating the block. Other validators, upon receiving the block and the proof, will no longer need to re-execute the transactions; they only need to verify the cryptographic proof. Since the computational cost of "verifying a ZK Proof" is several orders of magnitude lower than that of "re-executing transactions," and more importantly, the time required to verify a proof is nearly independent of the number of transactions covered by that proof, this allows Ethereum to significantly increase the block Gas limit to accommodate more transactions without significantly raising the hardware threshold for validators. Vitalik Buterin has mentioned that the Gas limit of L1 is expected to increase by 10 times as a result, and in the longer term, it could reach 100 times, thereby achieving L1 scalability while maintaining decentralization.

In summary, the future Ethereum L1 will architecturally resemble a massive, native ZK-Rollup, thereby positioning Ethereum L1 itself to potentially become "the world's largest ZK application."

Strict technical standards

The Ethereum team has set extremely stringent technical standards for the implementation of L1 zkEVM, aiming to reduce latency and improve throughput while also ensuring safety and decentralization commitments.

| Metric | Target Value | Principle/Impact | |------------------|-------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------| | Proof Delay (99% percentile ) | Within 10 seconds | This is the core of "real-time competition". The delay must be low enough to seamlessly fit into the 12-second block cycle without becoming a new bottleneck. | | Cryptographic Security | 128-bit ( minimum 100 bits during initial launch ) | Ensure that the cryptographic strength of the proof is sufficient to withstand current and foreseeable future computational attacks, ensuring the security of L1. | Proof Size | Less than 300 KiB | The proof must be small enough to propagate efficiently in the P2P network, avoiding becoming a new network bottleneck. | Validator Hardware Cost | No more than 100,000 USD | Aimed at achieving "home proof," ensuring independent stakers have the ability to participate in proof generation, serving as a last line of defense against censorship. | | Power Consumption of Validators | Below 10 kW | Power consumption comparable to that of home electric vehicle charging stations, further lowering the threshold for home validation and ensuring decentralization. |

Multi-proof security model

In order to guard against potential unknown vulnerabilities in a single zkEVM implementation, this roadmap introduces a "Multi-Proof" security mechanism. It requires multiple proofs generated by different teams for the validity of the same block. The validator's client will download and verify these proofs from different sources. Only when multiple independent proofs are all verified will the block be accepted by the consensus layer. This is essentially an extension and elevation of Ethereum's "client diversity" concept to the proof layer, enforcing redundancy and diversity through the protocol, providing deep defense for L1, and enhancing the robustness of the protocol.

2. Why must Ethereum be "fully ZK"?

Ethereum fully embraces zero-knowledge proof technology, which is a significant strategic transformation based on in-depth considerations of its economic model, competitive environment, and future market demand.

First, this is an important revision to the "L2-centric" economic model. After EIP-4844 introduced the blob mechanism, although it successfully reduced transaction costs for Layer 2, it also brought about unexpected side effects—seriously weakening the value capture ability of Layer 1. The sharp decline in Layer 1 transaction fee revenue and ETH burn amount directly impacted the deflationary expectations of ETH, leading to a sluggish performance in coin prices and rising dissatisfaction within the community. By upgrading the EVM to zkEVM, validating nodes can shift from the time-consuming "re-execution" mode to an efficient "verification" mode, which will significantly reduce Layer 1 latency and enhance throughput. In this way, Ethereum can re-attract high-value transactions that have extremely high requirements for security and instant finality, increase Layer 1 fee revenue, reactivate the burn mechanism of EIP-1559, and achieve a rebalancing of the economic relationship between Layer 1 and Layer 2.

Secondly, this is an asymmetric strategy to cope with the competition of high-performance public chains. In the face of the strong performance of new generation high-performance L1s like Solana and Sui in terms of TPS, Ethereum has chosen a unique competitive path. It has not followed its competitors in sacrificing decentralization to pursue performance improvements; instead, it leverages ZK technology to achieve a leap in performance by transforming the verification work from "expensive replay" to "cheap verification" while maintaining its core advantage of a million-level validator network. This strategy aims to solidify Ethereum's moat in terms of decentralization and security, while enhancing performance, striving to achieve both security and high performance.

Finally, this is a forward-looking layout to embrace the wave of RWA and institutional finance. RWA tokenization is widely regarded as the next trillion-dollar market opportunity for blockchain. With the entry of financial giants such as BlackRock and Franklin Templeton, unprecedentedly strict requirements for the underlying public chains in terms of performance, security, privacy, and compliance have been raised. Although L1s like Solana and Sui exhibit outstanding performance, they have relatively few validating nodes and a higher degree of centralization, along with a history of outages, making it difficult to meet the demands for security and stability needed for high-value financial activities. Meanwhile, various OP Rollups within the Ethereum ecosystem, while performing well and having good security due to state reversion to L1, present an unacceptable risk exposure for high-value financial settlements with their 7-day challenge period. In contrast, the cryptographic-level finality provided by ZK technology, along with the ability to prove compliance without disclosing sensitive data, perfectly aligns with the core needs of institutional finance. If the zkEVM upgrade can successfully enhance throughput, then the Ethereum ecosystem, which natively integrates ZK technology, will achieve "performance, security, and stability" simultaneously, becoming the ideal global settlement layer to support the wave of RWA.

3. ZK Finality in Action

The endgame of Ethereum's ZK has long been revealed, apart from the blog published by Sophia Gold this time:

In April 2025, Vitalik Buterin proposed a highly visionary idea: to replace the existing EVM with a RISC-V instruction set architecture that is more friendly to ZK. Supporters believe that compared to the inefficient performance of EVM in generating ZK circuits, the simpler architecture of RISC-V can bring an order of magnitude improvement in proof efficiency. Although this proposal has sparked controversy due to its disruptive nature to the existing ecosystem, it sets a clear "North Star" for Ethereum's ZK transition—defining the standards for the ideal zkEVM and indicating the direction for optimization.

At the Berlin workshop in June 2025, Ethereum Foundation researcher Justin Drake clearly announced that Ethereum would "fully bet on ZK" for L1 expansion. This statement confirms the core development team's firm determination.

The ZK finale of Ethereum is by no means just "talking the talk." Although Optimistic Rollup currently leads ZK Rollup in various key metrics, the difficulties hindering the practical application of ZK technology are being tackled one by one. The three fundamental reasons that have historically caused ZK Rollup to lag severely are:

First, there are the complexities of technology and performance bottlenecks: In the past, generating ZK proofs for generic EVM computations was considered extremely difficult, slow, and expensive, and even computationally infeasible.

Secondly, there is a gap in developer experience: ORU has achieved a high level of EVM compatibility from the very beginning, while early ZKR was not compatible with EVM, requiring developers to learn a completely new programming language, which creates a very high barrier to entry.

Finally, there is the fragmentation of liquidity and network effects: ORU has gathered a large number of users and liquidity due to its first-mover advantage, creating a strong network effect.

However, these historical obstacles are being overcome one by one.

In terms of proof speed, thanks to the advancements in next-generation proof algorithms such as PLONK and STARKs, as well as the development of hardware acceleration technologies like GPUs, FPGAs, and even ASICs, the ZK proof generation time has been significantly shortened. For example, Succinct's SP1 zkVM can now prove 93% of Ethereum mainnet blocks in an average of 10.3 seconds, very close to the 10-second target set by the Ethereum Foundation.

In terms of compatibility, zkEVM has undergone an evolutionary process from Type 4 to Type 1 compatibility. Today, projects like Scroll, Taiko, and Polygon zkEVM can achieve near-perfect EVM equivalence, fundamentally eliminating the gap in developer experience with ORU. Moreover, the Multi-Proof security model of L1 ZK relies on multiple independent proof systems, and the vigorous development of the current zkEVM track lays the foundation for achieving this security model.

In summary, the historical core obstacles that have led to the lag of ZK technology—performance and compatibility—are being rapidly overcome. The technology is fully prepared for large-scale practical applications, but the previous stereotype that ZK technology is "slow, expensive, and difficult" has made people reluctant to accept it for a time. The vision of the Ethereum core team to "make Ethereum the largest ZK application in the world" is exactly an endorsement for modern ZK technology, sounding the horn for large-scale investment of ZK technology into practical applications.

4. ROLLUP Ecological Transformation

NATIVE ROLLUP paves the highway for ZK ROLLUP

The comprehensive ZKification of Ethereum L1 will fundamentally reshape the competitive landscape of Layer 2, with the most revolutionary change being the introduction of "Native Rollup." Currently, ZK-Rollups require the deployment of complex validator smart contracts containing thousands of lines of code on L1 to verify the ZK proofs submitted from L2, which not only increases development difficulty but also brings security risks due to varying levels of developer expertise. After implementing zkEVM on L1, the EXECUTE precompiled function will be introduced, allowing ZK Rollups to directly call the embedded verification logic of the L1 protocol in L1 smart contracts without having to write their own contracts.

This change brings threefold advantages to ZK-Rollup:

First is the fundamental enhancement of security,