E2B and Sail were each faster in 1 of 2 shared sandbox benchmarks.
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.
Time from sandbox creation to the first successful command, with 100 sandboxes launched at the same time.
Time to interactive
E2B had a 1.69x lower median time to interactive (1.27s vs 2.14s for Sail).
16 runs from August 7, 2026 to 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
Sail had a 1.13x lower median total workload time (67.34s vs 75.86s for E2B).
10 runs from August 14, 2026 to October 30, 2026.
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.
$0.000014/vCPU-s + $0.0000045/GiB-s. Disk (20 GiB Pro) included.
Source pricing page$0.015/used vCPU-hr + $0.008/used GiB-hr + $0.0007/GiB-hr NVMe — bills observed usage, not reservations (upper bound shown at full utilization). Plus $0.012 per L Sailbox creation. No charge while sleeping.
Source pricing pageHave another question? Email us.
E2B and Sail were each faster in 1 of 2 shared sandbox benchmarks. In Burst TTI (October 30, 2026), E2B had a median time to interactive of 1.27s versus 2.14s for Sail, 1.69x faster. In DAX (October 30, 2026), Sail had a median total workload time of 67.34s versus 75.86s for E2B, 1.13x faster.