Upstash vs VercelSandbox Benchmark Comparison

Upstash
Faster in 1 of 2
vs
Vercel
Faster in 1 of 2

Upstash and Vercel were each faster in 1 of 2 shared sandbox benchmarks.

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.

BenchmarkUpstashVercelResultRatio
Burst TTI
Time to interactive · Run October 30, 2026
1.93s
100% success
423ms
100% success
Vercel faster
4.56x
DAX
Total workload time · Run October 30, 2026
57.26s
100% success
83.37s
100% success
Upstash faster
1.46x

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

Upstash

100% success
Median
1.93s
P95
3.80s
P99
3.97s
Upstash Burst TTI results →

Vercel

100% success
Median
423ms
P95
562ms
P99
585ms
Vercel Burst TTI results →

Vercel had a 4.56x lower median time to interactive (423ms vs 1.93s for Upstash).

Median time to interactive over time

102 runs from April 18, 2026 to October 30, 2026.

UpstashVercel
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

Upstash

100% success
Median
57.26s
P95
57.26s
P99
57.26s
Upstash DAX results →

Vercel

100% success
Median
83.37s
P95
83.37s
P99
83.37s
Vercel DAX results →

Upstash had a 1.46x lower median total workload time (57.26s vs 83.37s for Vercel).

Median total workload time over time

17 runs from July 24, 2026 to October 30, 2026.

UpstashVercel
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.

Upstash

Active CPU
$0.0064per run
57.26s median at $0.4000/hr

Large box (8 vCPU / 16 GB): $0.40/active-CPU-hour — assumes 100% CPU utilization for the whole build.

Source pricing page

Vercel

Active CPU + provisioned memory
$0.032per run
83.37s median at $1.3632/hr

$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 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.

Upstash and Vercel were each faster in 1 of 2 shared sandbox benchmarks. In Burst TTI (October 30, 2026), Vercel had a median time to interactive of 423ms versus 1.93s for Upstash, 4.56x faster. In DAX (October 30, 2026), Upstash had a median total workload time of 57.26s versus 83.37s for Vercel, 1.46x faster.

PartnersGoogle Cloud Run