sfcompute vs Microsandbox

Sandbox Benchmark Comparison · Updated October 30, 2026

sfcompute
Faster in
2of 2 benchmarks
#18 of 32 in Sandbox Provider Rating
vs
Microsandbox
Faster in
0of 2 benchmarks
#22 of 32 in Sandbox Provider Rating

sfcompute was faster in both shared sandbox benchmarks.

Head to head

  • Burst TTITime to interactive · lower is better
    sfcompute faster14.7x
    sfcompute
    322ms
    Microsandbox
    4.74s
  • DAXTotal workload time · lower is better
    sfcompute faster1.17x
    sfcompute
    41.72s
    Microsandbox
    48.76s

Burst TTI

October 30, 2026
Full leaderboard

sfcompute

100% success
Median
322ms
p95
467ms
p99
494ms
sfcompute Burst TTI results

Microsandbox

100% success
Median
4.74s
p95
5.15s
p99
5.26s
Microsandbox Burst TTI results

Median time to interactive over time

10 runs · September 4, 2026 to October 30, 2026
sfcomputeMicrosandbox

DAX

Full leaderboard

sfcompute

100% success · October 9, 2026
Median
41.72s
sfcompute DAX results

Microsandbox

100% success · October 23, 2026
Median
48.76s
Microsandbox DAX results

Cost per DAX run

sfcompute

Per GiB-hour (parkable)
$0.0085per run
41.72s median at $0.7315/hr

Rollout sandboxes at $0.04572/GiB-hr while active (16 GiB); parked/idle drops to ~$0.000139/GiB-hr. Interactive cpu-8 node is $0.4824/hr with a 15-min minimum.

Source pricing page

Microsandbox

Per-second wall clock
$0.0089per run
48.76s median at $0.6592/hr

$0.05/vCPU-hr + $0.0162/GiB-hr + disk $0.0001/GiB-hr. Plans include monthly compute pools.

Source pricing page
Compare sandbox costs across all providers →
Work at sfcompute or Microsandbox? 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.

sfcompute was faster in both shared sandbox benchmarks. In Burst TTI (October 30, 2026), sfcompute had a median time to interactive of 322ms versus 4.74s for Microsandbox, 14.7x faster. In DAX (October 9, 2026), sfcompute had a median total workload time of 41.72s versus 48.76s for Microsandbox, 1.17x faster.

PartnersGoogle Cloud Run