Sail vs TenkiSandbox Benchmark Comparison

Sail
Faster in 0 of 2
vs
Tenki
Faster in 1 of 2

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

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.

BenchmarkSailTenkiResultRatio
Burst TTI
Time to interactive · Run October 30, 2026
2.14s
92% success
2.10s
100% success
Roughly even
1.02x
DAX
Total workload time · Run October 30, 2026
67.34s
100% success
60.78s
100% success
Tenki faster
1.11x

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

Sail

92% success
Median
2.14s
P95
2.15s
P99
2.16s
Sail Burst TTI results →

Tenki

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

The medians are within 5% of each other (2.14s vs 2.10s), so this counts as roughly even.

Median time to interactive over time

16 runs from August 7, 2026 to October 30, 2026.

SailTenki
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

Sail

100% success
Median
67.34s
P95
67.34s
P99
67.34s
Sail DAX results →

Tenki

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

Tenki had a 1.11x lower median total workload time (60.78s vs 67.34s for Sail).

Median total workload time over time

15 runs from August 14, 2026 to October 30, 2026.

SailTenki
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.

Sail

Observed usage
$0.0049per run
67.34s median at $0.2620/hr

$0.015/used vCPU-hr + $0.008/used GiB-hr + $0.0007/GiB-hr NVMe — bills observed usage, not reservations (upper bound shown at full utilization). Plus $0.012 per L Sailbox creation. No charge while sleeping.

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.

Tenki was faster in 1 of 2 shared sandbox benchmarks, and 1 was roughly even. In Burst TTI (October 30, 2026), Sail had a median time to interactive of 2.14s and Tenki 2.10s, which counts as roughly even. In DAX (October 30, 2026), Tenki had a median total workload time of 60.78s versus 67.34s for Sail, 1.11x faster.

PartnersGoogle Cloud Run