Blaxel vs ModalSandbox Benchmark Comparison

Blaxel
Faster in 2 of 2
vs
Modal
Faster in 0 of 2

Blaxel was faster in both shared sandbox benchmarks.

Shared benchmarks
2
Last run
October 30, 2026
Want the full run details?Sign up free →

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.

BenchmarkBlaxelModalResultRatio
Burst TTI
Time to interactive · Run October 30, 2026
380ms
100% success
751ms
100% success
Blaxel faster
1.98x
DAX
Total workload time · Run October 30, 2026
52.95s
100% success
105.55s
100% success
Blaxel faster
1.99x

Burst TTI

Run October 30, 2026

Time from sandbox creation to the first successful command, with 100 sandboxes launched at the same time.

Time to interactive

Blaxel

100% success
Median
380ms
P95
425ms
P99
438ms
Blaxel Burst TTI results →

Modal

100% success
Median
751ms
P95
972ms
P99
996ms
Modal Burst TTI results →

Blaxel had a 1.98x lower median time to interactive (380ms vs 751ms for Modal).

Median time to interactive over time

144 runs from March 8, 2026 to October 30, 2026.

BlaxelModal
View the full Burst TTI leaderboard →

DAX

Run October 30, 2026

A real developer workload: install system packages, download Bun, clone the opencode repo, then run bun install and bun typecheck.

Total workload time

Blaxel

100% success
Median
52.95s
P95
52.95s
P99
52.95s
Blaxel DAX results →

Modal

100% success
Median
105.55s
P95
105.55s
P99
105.55s
Modal DAX results →

Blaxel had a 1.99x lower median total workload time (52.95s vs 105.55s for Modal).

Median total workload time over time

12 runs from August 21, 2026 to October 30, 2026.

BlaxelModal
View the full DAX leaderboard →

Cost per DAX run

Each provider's DAX median total workload time (run October 30, 2026) multiplied by its published rate at the 8 vCPU / 16 GiB benchmark spec. Workload time excludes sandbox create and destroy, and subscription floors and included credits are not modeled.

Blaxel

Active compute (GB-s)
$0.0097per run
52.95s median at $0.6624/hr

$0.0000115/GB-s on allocated RAM while active (16 GiB). CPU is derived from memory — 16 GB maps to ~6 cores, not 8. Upper bound shown.

Source pricing page

Modal

Per-second, max(request, actual)
$0.028per run
105.55s median at $0.9518/hr

Sandbox rate $0.00003942/core-s (4 cores = 8 vCPU) + $0.00000667/GiB-s. Regional multipliers (1.25–2.5x) not included.

Source pricing page
Compare sandbox costs across all providers →

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 was faster in both shared sandbox benchmarks. In Burst TTI (October 30, 2026), Blaxel had a median time to interactive of 380ms versus 751ms for Modal, 1.98x faster. In DAX (October 30, 2026), Blaxel had a median total workload time of 52.95s versus 105.55s for Modal, 1.99x faster.

PartnersGoogle Cloud Run