Isorun was faster in both 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
Isorun had a 43.1x lower median time to interactive (49ms vs 2.10s for Tenki).
18 runs from July 24, 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
Isorun had a 1.68x lower median total workload time (36.13s vs 60.78s for Tenki).
16 runs from August 7, 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.
$0.025/vCPU-hr + $0.015/GiB-hr. Published profile for 8 vCPU + 16 GiB is exactly $0.44/hr.
Source pricing page$0.000014/vCPU-s + $0.0000045/GiB-s; usage draws from monthly workspace credits first.
Source pricing pageHave another question? Email us.
Isorun was faster in both shared sandbox benchmarks. In Burst TTI (October 30, 2026), Isorun had a median time to interactive of 49ms versus 2.10s for Tenki, 43.1x faster. In DAX (October 30, 2026), Isorun had a median total workload time of 36.13s versus 60.78s for Tenki, 1.68x faster.