Enterprise Deployment Benchmarks
Measure execution latency and evidence handling across cloud, edge, endpoint, and enclave runners, without claiming superiority over unnamed competitors.
Deployment flexibility is only credible when latency, success rates, and evidence/redaction timings are measured per execution plane. Buyers in restricted networks need reproducible numbers tied to topology.
What this suite tracks
seconds
Cloud execution latency
p50/p95 time from dispatch to completed scenario with evidence.
seconds
Edge runner execution latency
Same measurement for edge-resident runners close to target systems.
rate
Endpoint agent execution success
Successful governed runs on endpoint agents under policy constraints.
rate
Secure enclave / local runner workflow
End-to-end success for enclave or air-gapped runner profiles.
seconds
Evidence bundle generation time
Time to produce signed evidence bundle after scenario completion.
seconds
Artifact upload / redaction time
Time to upload or redact artifacts according to policy.
How we measure
Each plane reports latency distributions, success rates, and evidence/redaction timings under stated policies. Cross-plane comparisons use identical scenario packs.
| Test environment | Representative topologies: SaaS control plane + cloud runners, customer VPC edge runners, endpoint agents on managed devices, and enclave/local runner with egress restrictions. |
|---|---|
| Dataset / workload | Standard scenario pack (read-only and approved write paths) executed on each plane. Network RTT and artifact sizes documented. |
| Sample size | Minimum 100 scenarios × 4 deployment planes (to be confirmed at first run). |
| Number of runs | 10 runs per scenario per plane; cold and warm starts separated. |
| Variance | Not yet measured. Future runs will report p50, p95, and coefficient of variation. |
| Excluded runs | None defined until first benchmark run is completed. |
| Date last run | Pending first benchmark run |
| Version tested | Pending first benchmark run |
| Repeatability | Topology diagrams, runner versions, and policy bundles ship with each benchmark pack. Planes without completed runs are omitted from results tables. |
Assumptions
- -Policies define allowed egress, storage, and redaction rules.
- -Customer-managed keys used where enclave profile requires them.
- -Latency includes control-plane dispatch overhead unless noted.
Results pending first benchmark run
This page does not display performance numbers until completed runs pass validation. When published, results include confidence ranges and sample sizes.
| Metric | Value | Confidence range | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cloud execution latency | Pending | - | Awaiting completed runs |
| Edge runner execution latency | Pending | - | Awaiting completed runs |
| Endpoint agent execution success | Pending | - | Awaiting completed runs |
| Secure enclave / local runner workflow | Pending | - | Awaiting completed runs |
| Evidence bundle generation time | Pending | - | Awaiting completed runs |
| Artifact upload / redaction time | Pending | - | Awaiting completed runs |
Factual capability comparisons
These tables describe architectural fit, not hostile competitor rankings or unverified speed claims.
Zof vs cloud-only testing tools
Compares execution reach and evidence handling, not SaaS vs self-hosted billing models.
| Dimension | Zof AI | Cloud-only execution |
|---|---|---|
Edge / on-prem runner support | Yes | Partial |
Enclave / air-gapped profile | Yes | No |
Endpoint agent execution | Yes | No |
Signed evidence bundles | Yes | Partial |
Policy-driven artifact redaction | Yes | Partial |
Some cloud vendors offer private link; evaluate their published deployment docs against your residency requirements. Quantitative comparison results are not published yet.
What this benchmark does not claim
- -Your network path, residency rules, and agent placement will differ from reference topologies.
- -Enclave benchmarks require customer-specific hardening; lab numbers may not transfer directly.
- -Until runs complete, no latency or success-rate claims are published.
Enterprise interpretation
Compare deployment options on evidence handling and execution reliability, not marketing checklists. Published tables will show per-plane distributions with sample sizes.
Continue your evaluation
Evaluate Zof against your reliability requirements
Review methodology, run a structured assessment, or benchmark against your workflow with enterprise architects.
