E2B vs Modal
| E2B | Modal | |
|---|---|---|
| Isolation | Firecracker microVM | gVisor |
| Cold start | 150ms | 800ms |
| Price / vCPU-hr | $0.05 | $0.14 |
| GPU | No | T4 → B200, incl. H100 |
| Session limit | Up to 24h | Configurable |
| Persistence | Pause/resume with memory state, snapshots | Volumes; ephemeral compute |
| MCP support | — | — |
| Free tier | $100 one-time credit (Hobby) | $30/mo free credits |
| Best for | Teams that want the cleanest SDK and strong microVM isolation for agent code execution. | Python/ML workloads and agents that need GPU inside the sandbox. |
The verdict
Choose E2B if teams that want the cleanest sdk and strong microvm isolation for agent code execution. Choose Modal if python/ml workloads and agents that need gpu inside the sandbox.
Headline rates rarely equal your bill — idle time, session length, creation fees and GPU minutes dominate. Model your actual workload in the cost calculator.
FAQ
E2B vs Modal: which is better?
It depends on your priority. E2B has the faster cold start (150ms vs 800ms), while E2B is cheaper per vCPU-hour. E2B is best for teams that want the cleanest sdk and strong microvm isolation for agent code execution. Modal is best for python/ml workloads and agents that need gpu inside the sandbox.
Is E2B or Modal cheaper?
E2B is cheaper on the headline vCPU-hour rate ($0.05 vs $0.14). Total cost depends on idle time, session length and creation fees — use the cost calculator to model your workload.
Get pricing for E2B or Modal
Tell us what you're building. We'll route you to the right sandbox teams for pricing and a demo — no spam.