Fastest L2 block time, live across Robinhood, Arbitrum, Base and 7 more
BlockchainsArbitrum
Leads334 ms
- p99
- 499 ms
- rank
- #2
- samples
- 342,255
zkSync Era
Trails4.75 s
- p99
- 56.40 s
- rank
- #8
- samples
- 9,983
Arbitrum vs zkSync Era
Arbitrum leads on 2 of 2 shared benchmarks, zkSync Era on 0. Arbitrum wins on Fastest L2 block time, live across Robinhood, Arbitrum, Base and 7 more (334 ms vs 4.75 s), Cheapest blockchain transaction fee, live across 15 L1 and L2 chains ($0.000807 vs $0.00182).
Arbitrum
Optimistic rollup built on Nitro stack with a fast-finality sequencer. Sub-second block times (~250 ms) via a 250 ms default block interval, far below the 2 s OP Stack convention. 7-day fraud-proof window for L1 finality.
zkSync Era
Matter Labs' zk-rollup with the ZK Stack reference implementation and a custom LLVM-based VM (EraVM). Batched producer with variable block cadence (p50 ~3-6 s) tied to proof generation rather than fixed sequencer intervals.
Side by side measurements
Cheapest blockchain transaction fee, live across 15 L1 and L2 chains
BlockchainsArbitrum
Leads$0.000807
- p99
- $0.000821
- rank
- #7
- samples
- 40,314
zkSync Era
Trails$0.00182
- p99
- $0.00183
- rank
- #9
- samples
- 40,314
Frequently asked questions
Arbitrum vs zkSync Era: which one is better?
Arbitrum and zkSync Era are compared on 2 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. Arbitrum leads on Fastest L2 block time, live across Robinhood, Arbitrum, Base and 7 more. See the live table on this page for every metric.
Which is faster on fastest l2 block time, live across robinhood, arbitrum, base and 7 more, Arbitrum or zkSync Era?
On the Fastest L2 block time, live across Robinhood, Arbitrum, Base and 7 more benchmark, Arbitrum leads at 334 ms versus zkSync Era at 4.75 s. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.
How is the Arbitrum vs zkSync Era comparison measured?
Every benchmark on this page uses the same open methodology, published at https://openchainbench.com/methodology. Data is CC-BY-4.0. Measurement harnesses are MIT-licensed.
How this pair was selected
A pair is published when all four conditions hold. Both providers run in the same OpenChainBench benchmark for at least seven consecutive days. Each provider has at least 1000 samples in the measurement window. The head to head query has observable third party search demand. Both providers have a public /products/[slug] page on OCB. The full pair ledger is versioned in the public repo so the methodology is externally verifiable.