Reviews
Cursor IDE Review 2026: Still the Best AI Code Editor?
An honest look at Cursor IDE in 2026: agent mode, codebase indexing, pricing tiers, and whether the $20/month Pro plan still beats GitHub Copilot.
May 31, 2026
Quick Verdict
Rating: 9/10
One-line verdict: Cursor is still the AI code editor to beat in 2026, with the best agent mode in the business and a pricing model that mostly makes sense.
Best for: Full-time developers working on real production codebases who want AI that actually understands their project, not just autocomplete with vibes.
What Is Cursor IDE?
Cursor is an AI-first code editor built on a fork of VS Code, developed by Anysphere. The whole pitch is simple: take the editor most developers already know, and rebuild the AI layer from the ground up instead of bolting it on as an extension.
The Cursor IDE review picture in 2026 is interesting because the competition has finally caught up on features, but Cursor still feels a step ahead on execution. Composer (the agent mode) handles multi-file edits that would have been science fiction two years ago. The codebase indexing actually works on monorepos. And the model picker now lets you swap between Claude Opus 4.6, GPT-5, and Gemini 2.5 Pro inside the same chat window.
Is it perfect? No. The pricing structure has gotten weirder, and the agent occasionally writes 400 lines when 40 would do. But as an honest answer to "what should I use to code with AI right now?" — Cursor is the default recommendation for most developers.
Key Features Breakdown
1. Composer Agent Mode
This is the headline feature, and it's the reason Cursor pulled ahead of plain GitHub Copilot. You hit Cmd+I, describe what you want, and the agent reads files, writes code, runs terminal commands, and iterates until the task is done. Think "junior dev who knows your codebase," except faster.
The quality of agent output scales directly with the underlying model. On SWE-bench Verified, Claude Opus 4.6 scores around 81% (self-reported by Anthropic, averaged across trials), and you can feel that in Composer. With weaker models, the agent flails more.
2. Codebase Understanding (@Codebase)
Cursor indexes your entire repository into a vector database locally and on Anysphere's servers. When you ask a question, it pulls relevant files automatically. This sounds boring until you try it on a 500k-line codebase and realize the AI actually knows where your auth middleware lives.
The @Codebase, @Files, @Docs, and @Web references are still some of the best context controls in any AI editor. Windsurf and Cline have copied the pattern. Cursor still does it best.
3. Tab Completion (The Cursor Tab Model)
Cursor trains its own custom autocomplete model, and it shows. The Tab model predicts multi-line edits, anticipates where your cursor is going to jump next, and frequently nails refactors with a single keystroke. It's the feature you stop noticing after a week, which is the highest compliment for any IDE feature.
GitHub Copilot's inline suggestions have improved a lot in 2026, but the cursor jump prediction is still a Cursor exclusive.
4. Multi-Model Switching
You can pick which model handles each chat or composer task. The default lineup as of early 2026 includes Claude Opus 4.6, Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5, Gemini 2.5 Pro, and a handful of smaller fast models.
For agent work, Claude Opus 4.6 is the obvious pick (Anthropic reports an ~81% self-reported SWE-bench Verified score, and Opus 4.6 currently leads most agentic coding leaderboards). For quick refactors, Sonnet 4.6 is faster and cheaper. For one-shot reasoning about an unfamiliar API, GPT-5 still holds its own.
5. Inline Edit (Cmd+K)
Select code, hit Cmd+K, describe the change in plain English, and watch a diff appear. This is the feature that converted a lot of skeptics. It's faster than typing the code yourself for anything more than three lines, and the diff-based review pattern means you stay in control.
6. Background Agents (Cloud)
Introduced last year, Background Agents run Composer tasks in cloud VMs. You kick off a task from your laptop, close the lid, and check the PR an hour later. Pretty useful for boilerplate work, less useful for anything that needs your judgment. The implementation is rough around the edges, but it's a glimpse of where agentic coding is heading.
7. Privacy Mode
Flip Privacy Mode on and Anysphere claims your code is never stored on their servers or sent to model providers for training. For enterprise teams, this is non-negotiable. The official policy is documented on Cursor's security page.
Real-World Performance
Based on community testing across Reddit's r/cursor, the Cursor forum, and benchmark reports, a few patterns emerge.
Where Cursor shines:
- TypeScript and Python projects with reasonable structure
- React, Next.js, and FastAPI codebases (the AI seems to know these intimately)
- Multi-file refactors where you describe the goal and let Composer work
- Writing tests for existing code (this is almost unfair, it's so good)
Where Cursor struggles:
- Very large monorepos (100k+ files) where indexing slows down
- Niche languages and frameworks with limited training data
- Long-context tasks that exceed even the 1M-token window of Claude Opus 4.6 (in beta)
- Sandboxed corporate networks (the cloud dependency bites here)
One consistent complaint across the community: Composer sometimes "helpfully" rewrites code you didn't ask it to touch. The fix is being more specific in your prompts and using the new "Read-only mode" flag for exploration tasks. But the default behavior assumes you want maximal action, which is a strong opinion not everyone agrees with.
Pricing Analysis
The Cursor pricing structure in 2026 has three main tiers, and you should think about which one fits you before signing up.
| Plan | Price | What You Get |
|---|---|---|
| Hobby | Free | 2,000 completions/month, 50 slow premium requests |
| Pro | $20/month | Unlimited completions, 500 fast premium requests, unlimited slow |
| Teams | $40/user/month | Pro + privacy mode, admin dashboard, centralized billing |
| Ultra | $200/month | 20x the Pro request limits for power users |
The "fast vs slow" request distinction is the part that confuses new users. Fast requests use prioritized capacity. Slow requests wait in a queue when servers are busy. In practice, slow requests during off-peak hours are basically instant. During business hours in US time, they can stretch to several seconds.
Is Pro worth $20/month? For anyone coding more than a few hours per week, yes, easily. The productivity boost from agent mode alone pays for itself in a single afternoon. The math gets harder for casual hobbyists who code occasionally — the free tier is enough for that crowd.
The Ultra tier at $200/month is the controversial one. It's clearly aimed at developers running multiple agent tasks in parallel, especially with background agents. If you're not hitting the Pro request limits, ignore it. If you are, the value is real.
For comparison: GitHub Copilot Pro is $10/month, and Copilot Pro+ runs $39/month. Cursor Pro sits in the middle on price but offers meaningfully better agent capabilities. Windsurf has a similar pricing structure to Cursor and competes hard on the free tier.
Pros and Cons
Pros
- Agent mode that actually works. Composer is genuinely useful for real multi-file changes, not a demo party trick.
- Best codebase context system on the market. The @-mention pattern for files, docs, web, and full codebase context is intuitive and powerful.
- Multi-model flexibility. Pick Claude Opus 4.6 for hard problems, Sonnet 4.6 for speed, swap whenever.
- VS Code compatibility. Your extensions, themes, and keybindings just work. Migration takes ten minutes.
- Cursor Tab is uniquely good. The custom autocomplete model predicts cursor jumps in a way no competitor matches.
- Strong free tier. Most editors gate AI features behind paywalls. Cursor lets you genuinely evaluate the product before paying.
Cons
- Cloud dependency. Cursor needs an internet connection for most useful features. Offline coding falls back to plain VS Code behavior.
- The slow request queue is a real annoyance. During peak hours, slow premium requests can feel punitive.
- Composer over-edits. The agent's default behavior is too aggressive on changes you didn't ask for.
- Pricing tiers are confusing. Fast vs slow requests, Pro vs Ultra, the math gets fuzzy quickly.
- Lock-in is real. Once you build a workflow around Cursor-specific features, switching to plain VS Code feels painful.
- Privacy mode disables some features. Indexing improvements that require server-side processing are limited.
How Cursor Compares to Competitors
The AI code editor space in 2026 is crowded. Here's where Cursor stands against the main rivals.
Against GitHub Copilot: Copilot is cheaper, ships with great inline suggestions, and integrates deeply with GitHub. But the agent mode (Copilot Workspace) still trails Composer for complex multi-file work. If you live inside GitHub's ecosystem and want the most native experience, Copilot wins. For raw agent capability, Cursor wins.
Against Windsurf: Codeium's Windsurf has closed the gap dramatically. Cascade (their agent) is excellent, and the pricing is competitive. The honest take is that Windsurf is a credible alternative now. Cursor still feels slightly more polished, but the gap is narrow.
Against Claude Code: This isn't really a fair comparison. Claude Code is a terminal agent, not an IDE. Many developers use both: Cursor for active coding, Claude Code for longer autonomous tasks. They complement each other.
Against Cline and other VS Code extensions: Cline is impressive for an open-source extension, but it lacks Cursor's custom autocomplete model and codebase indexing infrastructure. Great if you want to stay in vanilla VS Code with maximum control.
Who Should Use Cursor
Definitely use Cursor if:
- You're a professional developer coding daily
- You work on TypeScript, Python, React, or other mainstream stacks
- You want the most capable AI agent inside an editor right now
- You're already comfortable with VS Code
Maybe skip Cursor if:
- You code occasionally and the free tier of any tool covers your needs
- Your work involves highly regulated environments where cloud AI is forbidden
- You're deeply embedded in a JetBrains IDE and don't want to switch
- You prefer a fully open-source toolchain (look at Cline or Aider instead)
Final Verdict
Cursor in 2026 remains the AI code editor to beat, and the 9/10 rating reflects how far ahead the team has stayed despite serious competition. The combination of Composer agent mode, codebase indexing, and the custom Tab model creates a developer experience that's hard to replicate.
The biggest knock against Cursor is the pricing complexity and the occasional over-eagerness of the agent. Both are fixable problems, and the team has been responsive to community feedback in the past.
For anyone asking whether to start with Cursor or one of the alternatives: start with Cursor. Use the free tier for a week. If you find yourself reaching for Composer more than three times a day, upgrade to Pro and stop thinking about it. The $20/month is the easiest productivity purchase in software right now.
And if you're a senior engineer who has resisted AI tools so far because they felt like toys, give Cursor an honest week. The argument that AI editors are gimmicks died sometime in 2025. What's left is the question of which tool you trust with your codebase, and Cursor has earned a strong claim on that trust.
Sources
