Vercel 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
Vercel had a 24.3x lower median time to interactive (423ms vs 10.28s for Sandbox0).
17 runs from July 31, 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
Vercel had a 1.50x lower median total workload time (83.37s vs 124.96s for Sandbox0).
13 runs from July 31, 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.
$0.015/GiB-hr on the memory limit (16 GiB), billed by the second. Paused sandboxes stop compute charges.
Source pricing page$0.128/active-CPU-hr per vCPU + $0.0212/GB-hr provisioned memory (wall clock). CPU upper bound at 100% utilization; real bills for I/O-bound runs are lower.
Source pricing pageHave another question? Email us.
Vercel was faster in both shared sandbox benchmarks. In Burst TTI (October 30, 2026), Vercel had a median time to interactive of 423ms versus 10.28s for Sandbox0, 24.3x faster. In DAX (October 30, 2026), Vercel had a median total workload time of 83.37s versus 124.96s for Sandbox0, 1.50x faster.