Blaxel vs GravixlayerSandbox Benchmark Comparison
Blaxel and Gravixlayer were each faster in 1 of 2 shared sandbox benchmarks.
- Shared benchmarks
- 2
- Last run
- October 30, 2026
Scorecard
Median of each benchmark's primary metric; lower is better. Medians within 5% count as roughly even, and a benchmark gets no speed verdict when either provider completed fewer than 50% of runs.
Burst TTI
Run October 30, 2026Time from sandbox creation to the first successful command, with 100 sandboxes launched at the same time.
Time to interactive
Gravixlayer had a 3.74x lower median time to interactive (102ms vs 380ms for Blaxel).
Median time to interactive over time
4 runs from October 9, 2026 to October 30, 2026.
DAX
Run October 30, 2026A real developer workload: install system packages, download Bun, clone the opencode repo, then run bun install and bun typecheck.
Total workload time
Blaxel had a 1.11x lower median total workload time (52.95s vs 58.66s for Gravixlayer).
Median total workload time over time
5 runs from October 9, 2026 to October 30, 2026.
Methodology
- One workload, every provider. The same script, payload, and model hit every provider, addressed the way its own API expects. Nobody gets a tuned or special path.
- Repeated on a schedule. Every suite runs many iterations per provider, automated on a recurring schedule, so results reflect steady state rather than one lucky request.
- Raw results published. Every run is committed as JSON to the public benchmarks repo, next to the code that produced it. Nothing is cherry-picked or held back.
- How this comparison is built. Each benchmark compares the two providers' medians; results within 5% count as roughly even. A comparison is published only when both providers completed at least 50% of runs in 2 or more shared benchmarks run in the last 30 days.
Frequently asked questions
Have another question? Email us.
Blaxel and Gravixlayer were each faster in 1 of 2 shared sandbox benchmarks. In Burst TTI (October 30, 2026), Gravixlayer had a median time to interactive of 102ms versus 380ms for Blaxel, 3.74x faster. In DAX (October 30, 2026), Blaxel had a median total workload time of 52.95s versus 58.66s for Gravixlayer, 1.11x faster.