E2B vs Kosa8
Sandbox Benchmark Comparison · Updated November 13, 2026
vs
E2B was faster in the only sandbox benchmark with a speed verdict.
Head to head
- Time to interactive · lower is betterE2B faster1.71x
E2B
1.07sKosa8
1.83s - Total workload time · lower is betterNo verdict64.22s
Burst TTI
DAX
Work at E2B or Kosa8? 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 when both providers have at least one successful run in the same benchmark from the last 30 days. A benchmark only gets a verdict when both providers completed at least 50% of its runs. 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.
E2B was faster in the only sandbox benchmark with a speed verdict. In Burst TTI (November 13, 2026), E2B had a median time to interactive of 1.07s versus 1.83s for Kosa8, 1.71x faster.
Both providers have results in 2 sandbox benchmarks: Burst TTI and DAX. 1 of them has a speed verdict.
Success rates in the latest runs: Burst TTI: E2B 100%, Kosa8 100%; DAX: E2B 100%, Kosa8 0%. DAX has no speed verdict because Kosa8 completed fewer than half of its runs; E2B's median total workload time was 64.22s.
Burst TTI and DAX results are from November 13, 2026.
More comparisons
E2B vs