E2B vs Tensorlake

Sandbox Benchmark Comparison · Updated October 30, 2026

E2B
Faster in
0of 2 benchmarks
#8 of 32 in Sandbox Provider Rating
vs
Tensorlake
Faster in
1of 2 benchmarks
#7 of 32 in Sandbox Provider Rating

Tensorlake was faster in 1 of 2 shared sandbox benchmarks, and 1 was roughly even.

Head to head

  • Burst TTITime to interactive · lower is better
    Tensorlake faster1.23x
    E2B
    1.27s
    Tensorlake
    1.03s
  • DAXTotal workload time · lower is better
    Roughly even
    E2B
    75.86s
    Tensorlake
    78.16s

Burst TTI

October 30, 2026
Full leaderboard

E2B

100% success
Median
1.27s
p95
1.47s
p99
1.70s
E2B 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
E2BTensorlake

DAX

Full leaderboard

E2B

100% success · October 30, 2026
Median
75.86s
E2B DAX results

Tensorlake

100% success · October 23, 2026
Median
78.16s
Tensorlake DAX results

Median total workload time over time

10 runs · July 24, 2026 to October 9, 2026
E2BTensorlake

Cost per DAX run

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

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 E2B 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.
Read the full methodology →Raw results on GitHub ↗

Frequently asked questions

Have another question? Email us.

Tensorlake was faster in 1 of 2 shared sandbox benchmarks, and 1 was roughly even. In Burst TTI (October 30, 2026), Tensorlake had a median time to interactive of 1.03s versus 1.27s for E2B, 1.23x faster. In DAX (October 23, 2026), E2B had a median total workload time of 75.86s and Tensorlake 78.16s, which counts as roughly even.

PartnersGoogle Cloud Run