Comparison
Daytona vs E2B vs Modal: which sandbox for agent code?
Daytona, E2B and Modal compared on sandbox pricing, concurrency, GPU support and open-source status, plus why Daytona's flagship repo is now archived.
Comparison Customer service agents
Published prices for 21 AI support agents, converted to one comparable number: cost per conversation the AI closed on its own. Verified 13 Aug 2026.

At a realistic mid-market load (10,000 support conversations a month, 60% handled without a human), the same work costs $0.09 per resolved conversation on Crisp and $1.50 on Zendesk. Same tickets, same outcome, 16× the bill.
That gap is not a quality gap. It is a unit gap. Every vendor in this category has picked a different thing to charge for (a resolution, an outcome, a session, an action, a credit, a minute), and the headline price only becomes comparable once you convert all of them into the one number a support lead actually budgets against: cost per conversation the AI closed on its own.
No vendor does that conversion for you. So here it is.
| Situation | Buy | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Under ~1,300 AI conversations/month, chat-first | Crisp Plus, $295/mo | Cheapest published per-conversation economics here, and the AI is bundled rather than metered separately |
| You want a per-resolution price you can read before a sales call | CoSupport AI, from $0.19/resolution | The only vendor in this set publishing a sub-$1 resolution price, and it bills nothing on failure |
| Already deep in Zendesk / Freshdesk / Salesforce | Stay, but renegotiate the unit | Switching costs exceed the per-ticket delta for most teams; the unit is what’s actually negotiable |
| Complex multi-step workflows, six-figure budget | Sierra, Ada, PolyAI | A different capability class, but you will not see a price without a sales cycle |
| You need a deflection floor written into the contract | Tidio Premium | The only vendor here publishing a guaranteed resolution rate (50%) |
| Already on a helpdesk and want a capped price per resolution, without migrating | Aissist.io, $0.09/message, capped at $0.60/resolution | Usage-metered, with no platform fee, monthly minimum or handoff charges |
Everything below is verified against vendor primary sources on 13 August 2026.
“Billed when the AI fails?” is the column vendor pages bury.
| Tool | Unit billed | Published rate | Billed when the AI fails? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intercom Fin | Outcome | $0.99 per resolution or procedure handoff; $9.99 per qualification | No: plain handoffs are free |
| Zendesk | Automated resolution | $1.50 (committed volume) | No: escalations aren’t charged |
| Salesforce Agentforce | Action | 20 Flex Credits = $0.10 per action; $500 per 100,000 credits | Yes: actions bill regardless of outcome |
| Freshdesk Freddy | Session | $49 per 100 sessions ($0.49 each); first 500 free | Yes: every session bills |
| CoSupport AI | Resolution or response or flat | from $0.19/resolution; from $0.04/response; from $99/mo unlimited | No, on the resolution plan |
| Crisp | AI credits | $25 of credits ≈ 450 automated conversations (≈$0.056 each) | Consumption-based: credits burn either way |
| Tidio Lyro | Conversation | from $32.50/mo for 50 conversations ($0.65 each) | Yes: it counts if Lyro replies once |
| Aissist.io | Message, capped per resolution | $0.09 per message, capped at $0.60 per resolution; 1,000 free tickets a month | No: handoffs aren’t charged |
| Sierra, Ada, Parloa, Kustomer, Typewise, PolyAI, Forethought, Vida | n/a | Nothing published | Unknowable without a contract |
Eight of the 21 tools we list in this category publish no price at all. That is itself a finding: if a vendor won’t name a unit in public, you’re negotiating without a reference point, and the first number you hear will be anchored to your ticket volume rather than to their cost.
Assumptions held constant across every row: 10,000 conversations a month reach the AI first, 60% are closed without a human, human seat licenses excluded. This is the AI line item only.
| Tool | Billable events | Monthly AI cost | Cost per resolved conversation |
|---|---|---|---|
| CoSupport (flat / server-based) | None | $99 | $0.02 |
| Crisp (AI credits) | 10,000 conversations | ~$556 | $0.09 |
| CoSupport (resolution-based) | 6,000 resolutions | $1,140 | $0.19 |
| Salesforce Agentforce (Flex, 3 actions/conv) | 30,000 actions | $3,000 | $0.50 |
| Aissist.io (per message, capped per resolution) | Up to 6,000 resolutions at the cap | Up to $3,600 | Up to $0.60 |
| Freshdesk Freddy | 9,500 sessions | $4,655 | $0.78 |
| Intercom Fin | 6,000 outcomes | $5,940 | $0.99 |
| Zendesk | 6,000 resolutions | $9,000 | $1.50 |
| Agentforce (legacy per-conversation model) | 10,000 conversations | $20,000 | $3.33 |
Three things fall out of this that no vendor page will tell you.
The success-based pricing is the expensive pricing. Intercom and Zendesk only bill when the AI wins, and they are the two priciest options per win by a wide margin. You are paying a premium for risk transfer. Whether that premium is worth it depends entirely on how good your knowledge base already is. If you expect a 70% resolution rate, you’re buying insurance against an event that mostly won’t happen.
Session pricing punishes a bad quarter twice. Freshdesk bills $0.49 whether Freddy resolves the ticket or not. At 60% that’s $0.78 per win. At 30% (an ordinary first-quarter number for a thin knowledge base), the identical contract costs $1.55 per resolved conversation, more than Zendesk’s success-only rate. The cheaper-looking unit gets most expensive exactly when the deployment is going badly, which is when you can least defend it.
Salesforce’s per-action model is a volatility bet. At 3 actions per conversation it’s $0.50 a win. At 8 actions (a returns workflow that checks an order, validates a policy, issues a credit, updates a record and sends a confirmation), it’s $1.33. You discover which number you’re on after you’ve built the agent, not before.
Aissist is an Agentic AI Agent that resolves customer support and sales conversations end to end inside your existing helpdesk, and turns every conversation into real-time insight on customers, products, agents and operations.
Pricing (aissist.io/pricing, read 2 November 2026): Usage-metered, $0.09 per message, or capped per resolution at $0.60 per resolution, with no platform fee, monthly minimum, or handoff charges.
Pros
Cons
Best for: SMB and mid-market teams that want AI resolving real tickets on the helpdesk they already run, with published reliability and a cost they can forecast, without a migration or an in-house AI specialist.
Plans and setup are on Aissist.io.
Support leads shop on resolution rate. The published rates are not comparable, and at least one headline number isn’t measuring what a skimming buyer will assume.
Fin’s benchmark page advertises an 85% average resolution rate, drawn from 110 million conversations across 12,000+ customers and 15 industries. Read the label: that 85% is the average of the top 10 performers per industry, not the average customer. The industry toplines on the same page (98.2% for software and technology, 91.0% for education) are top performers too. It’s a real number measuring something other than what it looks like at a glance.
The deeper problem is that “resolution” is defined by whoever is billing you:
A 70% resolution rate on Zendesk and a 70% on Fin are therefore not the same 70%, and neither is auditable by you unless you instrument it yourself.
The one contractual answer in this set: Tidio’s Premium tier pairs pay-per-resolution billing with a guaranteed 50% Lyro resolution rate. It’s the lowest bar of the group, and it’s the only one written into the price.
Several tools in this category are priced per minute, because they’re voice-first: PolyAI (per-minute, enterprise contract, no published rate), Voicefleet (€99 (about $110)/€299 (about $333)/€599 (about $667) for 500/1,000/2,000 minutes), Workforce Wave, Vida. Aircall and CallHippo are cloud phone systems with AI features attached. They are not deflection engines and won’t be mistaken for one after a demo.
Minute-based pricing inverts the incentive of resolution-based pricing: an agent that talks a customer through a long call costs more than one that fails in thirty seconds. If you’re buying voice, the number to negotiate is average handle time, not containment.
Under roughly 1,300 AI conversations a month, Crisp Plus at $295 is hard to beat on published pricing, and it includes the AI rather than metering it as an add-on. The caveat: Crisp’s credits are consumption-based, so long or tool-heavy conversations will burn faster than the ~450-per-$25 estimate on their pricing page. Verify your own burn rate in month one rather than trusting the estimate.
Above that volume, CoSupport’s $0.19 per resolution is the strongest published number in this category by a factor of five, and the flat $99/month server plan is enough of an outlier to be worth a pilot on volume economics alone. The risk you’re pricing there is vendor risk, not per-ticket risk. CoSupport is a far smaller company than Zendesk or Intercom, and that belongs in the decision.
If you’re already deep in Zendesk, Freshdesk or Salesforce, the honest advice is that switching costs will exceed the per-resolution delta for most teams. What’s negotiable is the unit. Zendesk’s $1.50 is a committed-volume rate, which means it moves. Go into that conversation with the table above and a number of your own.
This spot is open
All 23 AI customer service agents
First paid plans from $10 to $250 a month.
Comparison
Daytona, E2B and Modal compared on sandbox pricing, concurrency, GPU support and open-source status, plus why Daytona's flagship repo is now archived.
Comparison
We checked all six pricing pages today. Only BuildShip has a real self-serve ladder. The other five gate you behind a sales call or a $500+/month floor.
Comparison
Skyvern, Browserbase, Browser Use, Playwright MCP, Hyperbrowser, and TinyFish compared on credential handling, session isolation, and audits, not speed.
Comparison
Zapier, Make, n8n, Activepieces, Pipedream and Trigger.dev meter in six different units. Which free tier survives real agent work, which runs out first.