Miosa vs Namespace

Sandbox Benchmark Comparison · Updated October 23, 2026

Miosa was faster in the only shared sandbox benchmark.

Head to head

  • DAXTotal workload time · lower is better
    Miosa faster1.14x
    Miosa
    40.70s
    Namespace
    46.21s

Miosa

100% success · October 23, 2026
Median
40.70s
Miosa DAX results

Namespace

100% success · October 30, 2026
Median
46.21s
Namespace DAX results

Median total workload time over time

7 runs · August 21, 2026 to October 23, 2026
MiosaNamespace
Work at Miosa or Namespace? 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 when both providers have at least one successful run in the same benchmark from the last 30 days. A benchmark only gets a verdict when both providers completed at least 50% of its runs. If a provider’s latest run of a benchmark failed, its most recent successful run from that window is used instead.

Frequently asked questions

Have another question? Email us.

Miosa was faster in the only shared sandbox benchmark. In DAX (October 23, 2026), Miosa had a median total workload time of 40.70s versus 46.21s for Namespace, 1.14x faster.

PartnersGoogle Cloud Run