Vote to see results!
Code editors are like a&&holes: everyone has one, and they all do the same thing.
But as we all know--some are more efficient than others.
super awkward...
Anywho, Cursor & Windsurf are the two AI code editors making waves right now (get it??). And since I've used both extensively to pump out mediocre code, I'd say that makes me an expert.
Let's examine each aspect, one by one.
The cost of using the editor, including any subscription tiers or free options.
$20/mo
$10/mo
The ease and steps involved in setting up the editor, including installation and configuration (and migration!).
Stupid easy
Stupid easy, includes 'Import from Cursor' now
The design, layout, and user experience of the editor's interface.
Fine once you get used to it. Chat & Composer are SEPARATE, and I don't like the design of composer (no border for the pane).
Simple! Less things to think about/worry about.
How well the editor's AI understands the structure and context of your entire codebase.
Works well I think--but one NEEDS to specific files/folders a lot of times.
Less consistent, but tends to "automatically" search for files/folders it needs. I ***think*** it tends to have better "deep context".
The reliability and correctness of the AI's suggestions and outputs. NOTE: Much of this depends on the AI models being used, as well as your programming language.
Best in class across any editor I've used.
MOSTLY great--but the 'tab/prediction/supercomplete' code is almost never what I want. The Cascade agent is much better.
The 'code for you' feature that takes prompts, analyzes, and implements changes. Called 'Cascade' in Windsurf, and 'Composer' in Cursor.
Composer works well, and the '@ context' is more robust (image, URL, etc). But the UI/UX is annoying, and it seems less intuitive overall. It's also faster than Windsurf, for sure (not necessarily a good thing).
Cascade is a bit slower, but is "more careful" and more accurate--especially on "larger chunks" of code. It also defaults to a "deep context" (searches for files/folders).
Code completions, tab completion, and AI predictions for what you're going to code next.
Really, really, really good. Intuitive, multi-line works well, and it's HYPER fast.
The predictions are straight-up bad most of the time. Other times, it just won't do anything.
My subjective experience of using the editor, including responsiveness, accuracy, engagement.
The 'chat and AI agent' in Composer is super clunky, but manual coding + autocomplete feels amazing. Also, definitely more BUGGY.
The chat & agent AI feel REALLY good, but working with tab/autocomplete does more harm than good.
How well do the AIs understand new frameworks, languages, recent changes, etc.? This SHOULD be based on the AI model as well.
Less understanding overall, but way easier to ADD context, documentation, etc.
Surprised me with it's implementation of Svelte 5. I'd say good!
The performance and response time of the editor and its AI features. Also depends on AI model!
Blazing fast, except when it's buggy.
Slower (not always a bad thing).
The difficulty level for new users to become proficient with the editor.
Bigger learning curve for the more advanced features.
Very intuitive. Feels more "non-developer" friendly.
The target audience or ideal users for the editor, such as solo developers or teams.
More seasonded developers.
Developers can still get great use out of this--but the AI agent features is where Windsurf shines. Good for non-developers
It’s like asking, “Should I get a dog or a cat?”
The answer is always "dog."
Just kidding. The real question is, what do you need to accomplish your goals??
If you’re newer to coding—or not a coder at all—Windsurf is your friend.
Its intuitive setup and simpler design make it less intimidating, and the AI agent feels more approachable for beginners (and arguably more complete!).
Plus, Windsurf is new--it's only a matter of time before it releases some of those "missing" features (like image analysis and more @ functionality).
For the seasoned coders who could TECHNICALLY code all their stuff manually...
(or copy/paste from Stack Overflow let's be real)
Cursor’s autocomplete / "code completion" is unmatched. It’s more of a “power user’s tool” that rewards those willing to put in the time to learn its quirks (and quickly forgo the occasional bugs).
But don’t write off Windsurf entirely—it still packs a punch for veteran devs, especially if you’re looking for something that can adapt to your workflow without requiring a three-hour crash course. Plus, its accuracy on larger-scale changes is impressive.
And again, all of these tools will eventually be exactly the same. #truth.
If you’re all about speed and precision (and can tolerate a few quirks), Cursor might be your soulmate. But if you want a tool that feels more thoughtful, intuitive, and beginner-friendly, Windsurf has your back. Honestly, either one beats manually hunting through Stack Overflow for the same bug you Googled last week.
The real winner here? OpenAI & Anthropic.
Because no matter which editor you choose, you're funding them. 😉