Daytona vs Tensorlake

Sandbox Benchmark Comparison · Updated October 30, 2026

Daytona was faster in both shared sandbox benchmarks.

Head to head

  • Burst TTITime to interactive · lower is better
    Daytona faster1.54x
    Daytona
    668ms
    Tensorlake
    1.03s
  • DAXTotal workload time · lower is better
    Daytona faster1.05x
    Daytona
    74.40s
    Tensorlake
    78.16s

Burst TTI

October 30, 2026

Daytona

100% success
Median
668ms
p95
747ms
p99
860ms
Daytona Burst TTI results

Tensorlake

100% success
Median
1.03s
p95
2.24s
p99
5.25s
Tensorlake Burst TTI results

Median time to interactive over time

87 runs · May 6, 2026 to October 30, 2026
DaytonaTensorlake

DAX

October 23, 2026

Daytona

100% success
Median
74.40s
Daytona DAX results

Tensorlake

100% success
Median
78.16s
Tensorlake DAX results

Median total workload time over time

16 runs · July 24, 2026 to October 23, 2026
DaytonaTensorlake

Cost per DAX run

Daytona

Per-second wall clock
$0.014per run
74.40s median at $0.6624/hr

$0.000014/vCPU-s + $0.0000045/GiB-s — identical rates to E2B. Creating/stopping transitions bill as running.

Source pricing page

Tensorlake

Active CPU + allocated RAM
$0.017per run
78.16s median at $0.8000/hr

$0.07/core-hr active CPU + $0.015/GB-hr RAM (on-demand rates; Pro is ~40% lower).

Source pricing page
Compare sandbox costs across all providers →
Work at Daytona or Tensorlake? See where you stand every day, with full run logs, not just on benchmark Friday.Get stealth benchmarks →

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. If a provider’s latest run of a benchmark failed, its most recent successful run from that window is used instead.

Frequently asked questions

Have another question? Email us.

Daytona was faster in both shared sandbox benchmarks. In Burst TTI (October 30, 2026), Daytona had a median time to interactive of 668ms versus 1.03s for Tensorlake, 1.54x faster. In DAX (October 23, 2026), Daytona had a median total workload time of 74.40s versus 78.16s for Tensorlake, 1.05x faster.

PartnersGoogle Cloud Run