Blaxel vs NovitaSandbox Benchmark Comparison

Blaxel
Faster in 2 of 2
vs
Novita
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.

BenchmarkBlaxelNovitaResultRatio
Burst TTI
Time to interactive · Run October 30, 2026
380ms
100% success
1.41s
100% success
Blaxel faster
3.71x
DAX
Total workload time · Run October 30, 2026
52.95s
100% success
81.07s
100% success
Blaxel faster
1.53x

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 →

Novita

100% success
Median
1.41s
P95
1.99s
P99
2.03s
Novita Burst TTI results →

Blaxel had a 3.71x lower median time to interactive (380ms vs 1.41s for Novita).

Median time to interactive over time

4 runs from October 16, 2026 to October 30, 2026.

BlaxelNovita
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 →

Novita

100% success
Median
81.07s
P95
81.07s
P99
81.07s
Novita DAX results →

Blaxel had a 1.53x lower median total workload time (52.95s vs 81.07s for Novita).

Median total workload time over time

4 runs from October 16, 2026 to October 30, 2026.

BlaxelNovita
View the full DAX leaderboard →

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 1.41s for Novita, 3.71x faster. In DAX (October 30, 2026), Blaxel had a median total workload time of 52.95s versus 81.07s for Novita, 1.53x faster.

PartnersGoogle Cloud Run