The Ethereum Constantinople hard fork, which was scheduled to occur at block height 7,080,000 in early 2019, marked a pivotal moment in Ethereum’s evolution. Designed as a non-contentious network upgrade, Constantinople aimed to enhance scalability, reduce transaction costs, and lay foundational improvements for Ethereum’s long-term transition to proof-of-stake (PoS). If you're an ETH holder or developer, understanding this upgrade is essential to grasp how Ethereum continues evolving.
For most users, the good news is simple: no action was required. If you held ETH in a wallet or exchange, your funds remained secure and automatically transitioned to the upgraded chain. The change was seamless—much like a background software update on your phone.
But what exactly is a hard fork? And how did Constantinople improve Ethereum’s core functionality?
What Is a Blockchain Fork?
A fork refers to a change in the blockchain’s protocol rules. Think of it like updating an operating system: new features are added, bugs are fixed, and performance improves. However, unlike centralized software updates, blockchain upgrades require consensus across a decentralized network.
There are two main types of forks: soft forks and hard forks.
Soft Forks: Backward-Compatible Upgrades
Soft forks introduce stricter rules that remain compatible with older versions. Nodes running outdated software can still validate new blocks because the changes don’t violate previous consensus rules. Over time, as more participants upgrade, the old rules naturally fade away.
Key traits of soft forks:
- Backward compatible
- Tighten existing rules (e.g., reducing block size)
- Do not result in a chain split
Because all nodes eventually adopt the new standard, the original chain continues uninterrupted.
Hard Forks: Creating a New Path
Hard forks, by contrast, introduce incompatible changes. Nodes using the old software reject blocks from upgraded nodes, leading to a permanent split—two separate chains with shared history up to the fork point.
This typically happens when:
- There's disagreement among developers, miners, or nodes about protocol direction
- Major upgrades require rule changes that old clients cannot accept
Notable examples include:
- Ethereum Classic (ETC), which emerged after the 2016 DAO fork
- Bitcoin Cash (BCH), which split from Bitcoin in 2017 over block size debates
Constantinople was a planned hard fork—but non-contentious, meaning nearly all stakeholders agreed on the changes. As such, the old chain (pre-fork Ethereum) was quickly abandoned, avoiding a lasting split.
What Was the Ethereum Constantinople Upgrade?
Named after historical cities—following previous upgrades like Homestead and Byzantium—Constantinople was not a radical overhaul but a strategic refinement. It bundled several Ethereum Improvement Proposals (EIPs) designed to optimize performance, reduce costs, and prepare for future scalability solutions.
These EIPs focused on gas efficiency, smart contract functionality, and delaying Ethereum’s "difficulty bomb"—a critical mechanism tied to its shift toward PoS.
Let’s explore each key proposal.
Key EIPs in the Constantinople Upgrade
EIP 145: Efficient Bitwise Shifting in EVM
The Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) lacked native support for bitwise shift operations (like SHL and SHR), forcing developers to simulate them using arithmetic operations—a process consuming up to 35 gas per operation.
EIP 145 introduced native bitwise shifting instructions, reducing gas costs to just 3 gas. This 10x improvement makes certain computations far cheaper, benefiting complex smart contracts and layer-2 scaling solutions.
👉 Discover how efficient blockchain operations can boost developer innovation.
EIP 1014: Skinny CREATE2 and State Channels
EIP 1014 added the CREATE2 opcode, enabling contracts to be deployed to predictable addresses based on sender, salt, and initialization code. This feature is crucial for off-chain scaling solutions, particularly state channels.
State channels allow users to conduct multiple transactions off-chain—similar to Bitcoin’s Lightning Network—settling only the final state on-chain. This drastically reduces congestion and fees while increasing throughput.
Projects like Raiden Network leveraged this capability to build scalable payment systems.
EIP 1052: EXTCODEHASH Opcode
Smart contracts often need to verify another contract’s bytecode. Previously, this required retrieving full bytecode via EXTCODECOPY, which was expensive and inefficient.
EIP 1052 introduced EXTCODEHASH, returning the Keccak-256 hash of a contract’s code. This allows contracts to compare hashes instead of entire codebases—cutting gas usage and improving efficiency.
This change benefits decentralized exchanges and multi-signature wallets that frequently validate contract integrity.
EIP 1283: Fairer SSTORE Gas Pricing
Storing data on Ethereum (SSTORE) had inconsistent gas costs depending on whether values were changed from zero or non-zero. This led to unpredictable pricing and potential exploitation in reentrancy attacks.
EIP 1283 refined the gas metering model to make storage changes more predictable and cost-effective—especially valuable for dApps managing dynamic user data.
EIP 1234: Delaying the Difficulty Bomb & Reducing Block Rewards
Two major components were bundled here:
1. Block Reward Reduction
The block reward was reduced from 3 ETH to 2 ETH per block. This slowed inflation, increasing scarcity and aligning incentives as Ethereum moved toward PoS.
2. Difficulty Bomb Delay
The “difficulty bomb” is a built-in mechanism that gradually increases mining difficulty, pushing miners toward adopting PoS. Without intervention, it would have made mining prohibitively hard—triggering what some called the “Ice Age.”
EIP 1234 delayed this bomb by 12 months, giving developers more time to finalize Casper and other PoS components without rushing deployment.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q: Did I need to do anything during the Constantinople upgrade?
A: No. Regular ETH holders didn’t need to take any action. Exchanges, wallets, and node providers handled the transition automatically.
Q: Was there a risk of a chain split?
A: While technically possible, no significant split occurred because the upgrade had broad community support. The pre-fork chain lost miner backing and became irrelevant.
Q: Did transaction fees decrease after Constantinople?
A: Fees depend on network demand. While EIPs like 145 and 1052 made specific operations cheaper, overall gas prices still fluctuate based on usage—especially during high-traffic periods.
Q: Did this upgrade switch Ethereum to proof-of-stake?
A: Not yet. Constantinople delayed the difficulty bomb but kept Ethereum on proof-of-work (PoW). Full transition to PoS came later with the Beacon Chain and Ethereum 2.0 upgrades.
Q: How did Constantinople affect scalability?
A: Direct throughput (transactions per second) didn’t increase significantly. However, EIP 1014 laid groundwork for layer-2 solutions like state channels, enabling future scalability gains.
👉 See how next-gen blockchain upgrades drive real-world adoption.
Final Thoughts
The Constantinople hard fork was a quiet but impactful milestone in Ethereum’s journey. By optimizing gas usage, enhancing smart contract capabilities, and managing the timeline for PoS adoption, it strengthened Ethereum’s foundation for future growth.
While users saw little change on the surface, developers gained powerful tools to build faster, cheaper, and more secure decentralized applications.
As Ethereum continues evolving—with upgrades like Istanbul, Berlin, London, and eventually full sharding—Constantinople remains a key chapter in its story of continuous innovation.
Whether you're a developer, investor, or enthusiast, staying informed about core protocol changes helps you navigate the ever-changing world of blockchain technology.
👉 Stay ahead of blockchain developments with insights from leading platforms.