E2B vs TenkiSandbox Benchmark Comparison

E2B
Faster in 1 of 2
vs
Tenki
Faster in 1 of 2

E2B and Tenki were each faster in 1 of 2 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.

BenchmarkE2BTenkiResultRatio
Burst TTI
Time to interactive · Run October 30, 2026
1.27s
100% success
2.10s
100% success
E2B faster
1.66x
DAX
Total workload time · Run October 30, 2026
75.86s
100% success
60.78s
100% success
Tenki faster
1.25x

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

E2B

100% success
Median
1.27s
P95
1.47s
P99
1.70s
E2B Burst TTI results →

Tenki

100% success
Median
2.10s
P95
2.18s
P99
2.18s
Tenki Burst TTI results →

E2B had a 1.66x lower median time to interactive (1.27s vs 2.10s for Tenki).

Median time to interactive over time

18 runs from July 24, 2026 to October 30, 2026.

E2BTenki
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

E2B

100% success
Median
75.86s
P95
75.86s
P99
75.86s
E2B DAX results →

Tenki

100% success
Median
60.78s
P95
60.78s
P99
60.78s
Tenki DAX results →

Tenki had a 1.25x lower median total workload time (60.78s vs 75.86s for E2B).

Median total workload time over time

11 runs from July 31, 2026 to October 30, 2026.

E2BTenki
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.

E2B

Per-second wall clock
$0.014per run
75.86s median at $0.6624/hr

$0.000014/vCPU-s + $0.0000045/GiB-s. Disk (20 GiB Pro) included.

Source pricing page

Tenki

Per-second wall clock
$0.011per run
60.78s median at $0.6624/hr

$0.000014/vCPU-s + $0.0000045/GiB-s; usage draws from monthly workspace credits first.

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.

E2B and Tenki 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 2.10s for Tenki, 1.66x faster. In DAX (October 30, 2026), Tenki had a median total workload time of 60.78s versus 75.86s for E2B, 1.25x faster.

PartnersGoogle Cloud Run