Neon vs TensorlakeStorage Benchmark Comparison
Tensorlake was faster in both storage measurements with a speed verdict.
- Shared storage measurements
- 3
- With a speed verdict
- 2
- Last run
- October 30, 2026
Scorecard
Median of each storage measurement's primary metric; lower is better. Medians within 5% count as roughly even, and a storage measurement gets no speed verdict when either provider completed fewer than 50% of runs.
| Benchmark | Neon | Tensorlake | Result | Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Upload (10 MB) Upload time · Run October 30, 2026 | 769ms 100% success | 491ms 100% success | Tensorlake faster | 1.57x |
| Download (10 MB) Download time · Run October 30, 2026 | 184ms 100% success | 149ms 100% success | Tensorlake faster | 1.24x |
| Snapshot create Snapshot create time · Run October 30, 2026 | No timing data 0% success | 0.05s 100% success | No verdict No speed verdict because Neon completed 0% of runs, fewer than the 50% required. | — |
Upload (10 MB)
Run October 30, 2026Time to upload a 10 MB file to the provider, measured in the 10 MB storage lifecycle benchmark.
Upload time
Tensorlake had a 1.57x lower median upload time (491ms vs 769ms for Neon).
Median upload time over time
12 runs from August 14, 2026 to October 30, 2026.
Download (10 MB)
Run October 30, 2026Time to download the same 10 MB file back, measured in the 10 MB storage lifecycle benchmark.
Download time
Tensorlake had a 1.24x lower median download time (149ms vs 184ms for Neon).
Median download time over time
12 runs from August 14, 2026 to October 30, 2026.
Snapshot create
Run October 30, 2026Time to create a snapshot of a bucket holding a small dataset of 10 objects.
Snapshot create time
No speed verdict because Neon completed 0% of runs, fewer than the 50% required.
View the full Snapshot create leaderboard →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 the 10 MB storage lifecycle benchmark reliably: at least 50% success for each provider, in benchmark runs from the last 30 days.
Frequently asked questions
Have another question? Email us.
Tensorlake was faster in both storage measurements with a speed verdict. In Upload (10 MB) (October 30, 2026), Tensorlake had a median upload time of 491ms versus 769ms for Neon, 1.57x faster. In Download (10 MB) (October 30, 2026), Tensorlake had a median download time of 149ms versus 184ms for Neon, 1.24x faster.