e2bvstemporal
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| e2b | temporal | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 76/100 | 83/100 |
| Rank in category | #14 of 209 in AI Agents | #1 of 1 in Workflow |
| GitHub stars | 14 595 | 24 044 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +657 | +784 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 76 | 11 |
| Latest release | @e2b/code-interpreter-python@2.11.6 · 28 Oct 2026 | v1.30.8 · 12 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Python | Go |
Which one should you pick?
temporal scores 83/100 against 76/100 for e2b, so it is the safer default.
e2b ships more often: 76 stable releases in the past year, against 11 for temporal.
If you want the quickest setup, e2b is easier to run; temporal needs more configuration.
e2b details →temporal details →