About
Work
Blog
Podcast
Projects

NFTool: Optimizing Smart Contracts for NFT Creation

image
August 13, 2022

Overview

NFTool is a cutting-edge platform designed to democratize NFT creation by offering a no-code solution that empowers artists to generate unique collections without the need for technical expertise. As the CEO and developer of NFTool, I was responsible for not only leading the development of the platform but also for selecting the most optimal smart contract blueprint to power the backend of the platform. Our team, including Alberto (who led the AI image generation and the UI/UX design) and Matt (our artist), worked in close collaboration to develop and refine the AI-driven art generation engine and the supporting infrastructure for the NFT creation process. The project also integrated key design elements for creating and managing NFT collections, ensuring that the smart contract chosen would meet all the functional and economic requirements.

Smart Contract Optimization Analysis

One of the key challenges was to identify the most efficient ERC721 protocol for handling the minting, deployment, and transfers of large NFT collections. This decision was made after performing an extensive analysis of several popular ERC721 implementations. The goal was to ensure that NFTool could handle a large number of NFTs while optimizing for gas efficiency, ease of use, and scalability. We conducted a detailed comparison between several ERC721-based smart contracts, focusing on their gas optimization for deployment, minting, and transferring NFTs. The four smart contracts analyzed were:

Contract Comparison

For our analysis, we assumed that gas cost was 30 GWEI and ETH price was $2,000. OpenZeppelin ERC721 (ERC721O)
  • Deployment Cost: 1,933,035 gas ($115.98)
  • Minting Cost: 659,490 gas ($39.57)
  • Transfer Cost: 489,548 gas ($29.37)
  • Key Characteristics:
    • Industry standard implementation
    • Widely trusted and audited
    • Not optimized for large-scale operations
Azuki's ERC721A
  • Deployment Cost: 1,286,653 gas ($77.20)
  • Minting Cost: 595,600 gas ($35.74)
  • Transfer Cost: 487,158 gas ($29.23)
  • Key Characteristics:
    • Optimized for batch minting
    • Lowest deployment cost
    • Balanced gas efficiency across operations
ERC721X
  • Deployment Cost: 2,125,573 gas ($127.53)
  • Minting Cost: 586,870 gas ($35.21)
  • Transfer Cost: 450,842 gas ($27.05)
  • Key Characteristics:
    • Best transfer cost optimization
    • Highest deployment cost
    • Recent implementation with promising features
ERC721i
  • Deployment Cost: 1,897,401 gas ($113.84)
  • Minting Cost: 522,200 gas ($31.32)
  • Transfer Cost: 1,185,296 gas ($71.12)
  • Key Characteristics:
    • Innovative pre-minting feature
    • Most efficient minting process
    • Highest transfer costs

Why ERC721A Was Chosen

After considering the results of this analysis, we decided that ERC721A (Azuki's ERC721A implementation) would be the best fit for the NFTool platform. Below are the main reasons behind this decision:
  1. Gas Efficiency: ERC721A offered the best balance between deployment and minting costs. Although ERC721X had slightly lower transfer costs, its deployment cost was significantly higher, which would not be ideal for scaling NFTool's platform. ERC721A provided a solid optimization for both minting and transferring NFTs, making it the most efficient overall in terms of both development and operational costs.
  2. Battle-Tested Stability: Azuki's ERC721A is a well-established and battle-tested smart contract widely used in the industry, offering proven reliability for large-scale NFT projects. This was an important factor in ensuring that NFTool could scale effectively without running into unforeseen issues in production.
  3. Secondary Market Efficiency: While ERC721X showed better optimization for transfers, its higher deployment cost outweighed the savings on the secondary market, especially in a non-congested network. ERC721A still provides an efficient solution for secondary transfers while being more cost-effective in the long term.

Conclusion

In conclusion, although ERC721X showed strong promise in terms of secondary market savings, the overall combination of gas optimization, reliability, and community adoption made ERC721A the best choice for NFTool's smart contract blueprint. This analysis highlights the importance of balancing deployment, minting, and transfer costs while also considering the broader ecosystem of tools, such as Opensea and Rarible, which work seamlessly with ERC721A. While we're confident in this choice, we will continue to monitor gas trends and Ethereum updates, including the upcoming "Merge," which is expected to further reduce gas fees, to ensure NFTool remains efficient and competitive. See the repo for detailed analysis and code.