Cursor AI Editor Review: Is It the New King of Coding?

Imagine a code editor that doesn't just autocomplete your syntax but actually understands your entire project architecture. That is the promise of Cursor, an AI-native code editor that is quickly replacing VS Code for professional developers.

Often defined as the "king of AI-native IDEs," Cursor acts as a supercharged version of VS Code, rebuilt from the ground up with artificial intelligence at its core. It is designed specifically for developers and technical founders who demand power, control, and deep AI integration.

But is it worth the hype? Here is the deep dive.

The "Brain" Selection: Flexibility & Speed

Most AI tools lock you into one model. Cursor offers flexibility, allowing you to switch between a curated list of LLMs to suit your situation:

• Claude 4.5 Sonnet: Excellent for complex logic.

• OpenAI GPT-5/5.1: The standard for reasoning.

• Gemini Pro: (Including advanced versions like Gemini 3 Pro) for high-context tasks.

Crucially, Cursor features "Composer," its native, low-latency model designed specifically for coding. It delivers lightning-fast suggestions (typically under 30 seconds), allowing you to pick the perfect brain to suit your situation.

Key Features & Workflows

At first glance, Cursor feels familiar—it’s a VS Code-like editor. But under the hood, it packs features that allow it to reason across multiple files at once.

1. Tab & "Composer"

The Composer model is the standout. It allows for fast, efficient AI coding assistance. It can generate entire modules or perform large-scale refactoring from a single prompt, significantly improving workflow speed.

2. Inline Chat & Refactoring

If you want to refactor, debug, or add functionality, simply select a block of code, hit Ctrl+K, and tell the AI what you want in plain English. It keeps you in the loop for approval to ensure your thoughts are turned into reality.

3. Project-Wide Awareness

Unlike simple autocomplete tools, Cursor understands your project's architecture, dependencies, and coding patterns. This makes complex changes and multi-file reasoning much easier for professional work.

4. Agentic Capabilities

The latest updates introduce powerful autonomous features:

• Plan Mode: The AI asks clarifying questions before generating code to improve output quality.

• Autonomous Agent: It can run terminal commands, read/write across multiple files, and debug on its own—even for complex, multi-step tasks.

• Parallel Agents: You can run up to 8 AI agents in parallel. Crucially, these run using isolated Git worktrees, allowing for safer experimentation without breaking your main branch.

5. GitHub Integration & "Bugbot"

Cursor integrates seamlessly with GitHub. It features a specific "Bugbot" for automated checks and assistance with code reviews and pull requests.

6. UI Development Tools

For frontend work, Cursor includes an embedded browser with DOM inspection tools, helping developers test and validate interfaces directly within the IDE.

Pros & Cons: The Honest Truth

✅ The Strengths

• Productivity Boost: Between autocomplete and polished editing, it delivers highly accurate and contextually relevant suggestions.

• Deep Indexing: Codebase indexing allows "Composer" to generate entire modules with low latency.

• Ergonomics: No need to switch windows or apps; suggestions appear inline and adapt to your style.

• Safety: The ability to run multiple autonomous AI agents simultaneously across isolated codebase copies is a major advantage for productivity.

❌ The Weaknesses

• Steep Learning Curve: Many users miss out on powerful features like Plan Mode, advanced context management, and multi-agent workflows because they aren't aware of them.

• Performance: It can feel slow on very large or legacy codebases, though the Composer model has mitigated this for many. Occasionally, it may miss applying an edit correctly.

• Cost & Value: The Pro plan is ~$20/month, with higher tiers (Teams/Ultra) being costlier. This makes the cost-benefit analysis a bit unclear for some. Recent pricing changes caused user backlash, though the company addressed this with clearer communication and credit models.

Pricing

• Hobby (Free)
  Think of this as a “perpetual trial.” The free tier is permanent but heavily rate‑limited and often pushed into a slower queue during peak times, so it’s fine for students or hobbyists experimenting, not for full‑time professional work. Some new users see short Pro trials layered on top, but that promo is not guaranteed and shouldn’t be treated as a core feature.

• Pro ($20/month)
  This is the sweet spot for most developers: you get a modest monthly budget of frontier‑model usage (e.g., Claude 3.5 Sonnet / GPT‑4‑class) plus effectively unlimited inline/tab completions. Once that credit pool is burned, you can still use Cursor with lighter models or pay overages, so it works well if you code daily but don’t offload everything to heavy agents.

• Pro+ ($60/month)
  This tier is for “full‑time AI coders” who live in the tool 6–8 hours a day and regularly exhaust Pro’s monthly credits. You’re essentially buying roughly 3x the Pro credit pool so large refactors, long debugging sessions, and frequent background agents don’t force you into strict rationing by the third week of the month.

• Ultra ($200/month)
  You get 20x the fast requests of the Pro plan. It is functionally "unlimited" for a single human being; you simply cannot type fast enough to exhaust it.

• Business ($40/user/month)
  You are paying to ensure "Privacy Mode" is enforced by default, meaning absolutely no one trains on your code.
  Best For: Teams and companies where protecting Intellectual Property (IP) is non-negotiable.

Full pricing details are available on Cursor’s official website

Cursor vs. The Competition

Cursor vs. GitHub Copilot

GitHub Copilot is great for autocomplete but acts more like a helper. Cursor acts like a partner with a holistic view.

• The Gap: Copilot has added some agent-like features recently, closing the gap slightly.

• The Winner: Cursor’s agent orchestration and Composer model still lead in handling complex, multi-file projects.

• The Ecosystem: Some developers have switched back to the cheaper combo of VS Code + Copilot due to pricing, but for teams invested in AI-native workflows, Cursor remains a top choice.

Cursor vs. Windsurf & Others

Cursor is widely seen as the more established choice for teams already invested in its ecosystem. While alternatives like Windsurf, Codespaces, and VS Code extensions exist, the consensus is that if Windsurf weren't around, Cursor would be the undisputed #1.