Windsurf vs Cursor: Which AI Code Editor is Better? (2026 Comparison)
Windsurf and Cursor are two of the most popular AI-powered code editors in 2026, and both are forked from VS Code. If you are searching for windsurf vs cursor to decide which one to use, this guide covers every major difference: pricing, AI models, agentic features, rules configuration, MCP server support, extension ecosystems, and performance.
TL;DR: Cursor is best for developers who want best-in-class Tab completions, broad multi-model support, and a mature ecosystem. Windsurf is best for developers who want a generous free tier, agentic Cascade workflows, and a lower price at every plan level. Both are strong choices -- the right pick depends on your budget and workflow.
Quick Comparison Table
Here is the full windsurf vs cursor feature comparison at a glance:
| Feature | Windsurf | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| Base | VS Code fork | VS Code fork |
| Developer | Codeium (now OpenAI) | Anysphere |
| Free tier | Generous free usage | Limited Hobby tier |
| Pro price | $15/mo | $20/mo |
| Team price | $25/mo per seat | $40/mo per seat |
| Tab completions | Yes | Yes (industry-leading) |
| Agentic mode | Cascade (autonomous flows) | Composer (step-by-step) |
| AI models | Proprietary + Claude, GPT-4o | Claude, GPT-4o, Gemini, custom |
| Rules system | Windsurf Rules | .cursorrules |
| MCP support | Yes | Yes |
| AI search | Built-in | Via extensions |
| Extension support | VS Code compatible | VS Code compatible (larger ecosystem) |
| OS support | macOS, Linux, Windows | macOS, Linux, Windows |
| Context window | Varies by model | Varies by model |
How Each Editor Works
Both Windsurf and Cursor are VS Code forks with AI built into the editing experience. The core difference is in how each editor approaches AI-assisted coding.
Windsurf: Cascade Agentic Flows
Windsurf (originally launched as Codeium before rebranding) centers its AI experience around Cascade, an agentic flow system that can autonomously plan and execute multi-step coding tasks. When you describe a task, Cascade reads your codebase, creates a plan, edits files, runs terminal commands, and iterates until the task is complete -- all within the editor.
Windsurf also offers standard inline completions and a chat panel, but Cascade is the differentiating feature. It feels closer to having an autonomous agent working inside your IDE.
Cursor: Tab Completions and Composer
Cursor is best known for its Tab completions, which are widely regarded as the best inline AI completions available. As you type, Cursor predicts not just the current line but multi-line completions that understand your codebase context. For larger tasks, Composer mode handles multi-file edits with visual diff review.
Cursor's approach is more interactive: it proposes changes as inline diffs that you accept or reject, giving you granular control over every edit. This makes it excellent for developers who want AI assistance without giving up manual oversight.
AI Model Support
When comparing windsurf vs cursor on model support, Cursor offers significantly more flexibility.
| Feature | Windsurf | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| Completions model | Proprietary (Codeium) | Proprietary + multi-model |
| Chat models | Claude, GPT-4o | Claude, GPT-4o, Gemini, custom |
| Agentic models | Claude, GPT-4o | Claude, GPT-4o, Gemini, custom |
| Model switching | Model picker | Model picker (more options) |
| Bring your own key | Limited | Yes (multiple providers) |
| Custom/local models | No | Yes (via API key) |
Cursor lets you switch between OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and custom model providers on a per-task basis. Windsurf uses its own proprietary models for completions and offers Claude and GPT-4o for chat and agentic tasks, but with less flexibility to bring your own API keys or use local models.
Pricing Comparison
Pricing is one of the biggest differentiators in the windsurf vs cursor debate. Windsurf is cheaper at every tier.
| Plan | Windsurf | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Generous free tier | Limited Hobby tier |
| Pro (individual) | $15/mo | $20/mo |
| Team | $25/mo per seat | $40/mo per seat |
| Enterprise | Custom pricing | Custom pricing |
| Usage limits | Flow action credits | 500 fast requests/mo |
| Overage behavior | Reverts to free tier | Throttled to slow models |
Windsurf's free tier is notably more generous than Cursor's, making it the better choice for developers who want to try AI-assisted coding without a subscription. At the Pro level, Windsurf saves $5/month. For teams, the difference is even larger: $25/seat vs $40/seat, which adds up quickly for organizations.
Note on pricing changes: Windsurf was acquired by OpenAI in late 2025. Pricing and model availability may change as integration continues. Check each editor's website for the latest plans.
Rules and Configuration System
Both editors support project-level AI instructions that guide how the AI writes code for your project. The implementation differs.
Windsurf Rules
Windsurf uses a rules system that allows you to define project-level instructions in configuration files. Rules tell the AI about your coding standards, frameworks, conventions, and project structure. Windsurf supports both global rules (applying to all projects) and workspace-level rules.
Cursor Rules
Cursor uses .cursorrules files placed in your project root. These are plain-text instruction files that get injected into every AI interaction. Cursor also supports a .cursor/rules/ directory for organizing multiple rule files and scoping them to specific file patterns.
| Rules Feature | Windsurf | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| Project-level rules | Yes | Yes (.cursorrules) |
| Global rules | Yes | Yes |
| File-pattern scoping | Limited | Yes (.cursor/rules/) |
| Rule directories | Yes | Yes (more mature) |
| Community sharing | Browse rules | Browse rules |
Both systems achieve the same goal, but Cursor's rules system is more mature with better support for scoped rules that apply only to specific file types or directories. Browse community-created rules for Windsurf and Cursor in our integrations directory.
MCP Server Support
Both Windsurf and Cursor support MCP (Model Context Protocol) servers, which connect the AI to external tools, APIs, databases, and services. MCP is becoming the standard protocol for AI tool integrations, and both editors have adopted it.
| MCP Feature | Windsurf | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| stdio transport | Yes | Yes |
| SSE transport | Yes | Yes |
| Per-project config | Yes | Yes (.cursor/mcp.json) |
| Global config | Yes | Yes |
| Server management UI | Yes | Yes |
In practice, MCP support is comparable between the two editors. The same MCP servers work in both. Browse our directory of MCP servers to find integrations for your stack.
Extension Ecosystem
Since both editors are VS Code forks, they support VS Code extensions. However, there are practical differences in ecosystem maturity.
Cursor has been available longer and has a larger community of developers building extensions and integrations specifically for it. Windsurf supports the same VS Code extension marketplace, but some extensions may have compatibility quirks due to differences in how each fork handles the extension API.
For AI-specific tooling, both editors offer their own built-in capabilities that overlap with what extensions like GitHub Copilot provide. Most developers disable competing completion extensions to avoid conflicts.
Performance
Both editors are Electron-based VS Code forks, so baseline performance is similar. The key performance differences are in AI response times.
- Tab completions: Cursor's completions are generally faster and more contextually accurate, especially for multi-line predictions
- Agentic tasks: Windsurf's Cascade can feel faster for autonomous multi-step workflows because it streams actions continuously rather than waiting for approval at each step
- Startup time: Both are comparable, though extension load times vary by your setup
- Memory usage: Both consume similar RAM; AI features add overhead versus plain VS Code
For large monorepos, both editors can struggle with indexing. Cursor's codebase indexing for @codebase queries is more mature and generally produces better results for semantic code search.
Which Editor Is Best for You?
Choose Windsurf if you...
- Want a generous free tier to try AI coding without committing to a subscription
- Prefer autonomous agentic workflows -- Cascade handles multi-step tasks with less manual intervention
- Are budget-conscious -- $15/mo Pro and $25/mo Team pricing undercuts Cursor at every level
- Want built-in AI search integrated directly into the editor
- Are comfortable with fewer model choices in exchange for a more integrated experience
Choose Cursor if you...
- Want the best Tab completions -- Cursor's inline predictions are widely considered industry-leading
- Need multi-model flexibility -- switch between Claude, GPT-4o, Gemini, and custom models per task
- Want a mature rules system with file-pattern scoping and directory-based organization
- Prefer reviewing diffs before they apply -- Composer's visual diff workflow gives more control
- Value ecosystem maturity -- larger community, more third-party integrations, and longer track record
- Want to bring your own API keys for maximum model flexibility and cost control
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I import my Cursor settings into Windsurf?
Yes. Since both are VS Code forks, your extensions, keybindings, themes, and editor settings transfer easily. Windsurf offers an import wizard on first launch. You will need to manually migrate your .cursorrules to Windsurf's rules format, but the content is largely the same.
Which has better code quality output?
Code quality depends more on the underlying AI model than the editor. Both editors can use Claude and GPT-4o for chat and agentic tasks. Cursor's advantage is broader model selection, so you can pick the best model for each task. Windsurf's Cascade may produce more cohesive results on multi-step tasks because it maintains context across the entire flow.
Is Windsurf still independent after the OpenAI acquisition?
OpenAI acquired Codeium (Windsurf's parent company) in late 2025. The editor continues to operate, but the long-term model strategy and pricing may shift toward OpenAI's ecosystem. Keep an eye on official announcements for changes.
Do both editors work with the same MCP servers?
Yes. MCP is a standardized protocol, so the same servers work in both Windsurf and Cursor (as well as Claude Code and other MCP-compatible tools). Browse our MCP server directory for integrations.
Which is better for large codebases?
Cursor generally handles large codebases better thanks to its more mature codebase indexing and @codebase semantic search. Windsurf's Cascade can work across many files autonomously, but context management in very large projects is less refined. For extremely large monorepos, consider supplementing either editor with Claude Code skills for targeted codebase operations.
The Verdict: Windsurf vs Cursor in 2026
The cursor vs windsurf decision comes down to two main factors: budget and workflow preference.
- Windsurf wins on price and agentic autonomy. Its generous free tier and lower Pro pricing make it the more accessible option. Cascade's autonomous workflow is excellent for developers who want the AI to handle multi-step tasks with minimal intervention.
- Cursor wins on completions, model flexibility, and ecosystem maturity. Its Tab completions are the best in the market, its multi-model support gives you more control, and its larger community means more resources and integrations.
Both are excellent AI code editors. If you are coming from plain VS Code, either one will dramatically improve your workflow. Try both free tiers and see which AI interaction style suits you better.
For more AI coding tool comparisons, explore our skills directory, browse MCP servers that work with both editors, or check out our rules guides for Cursor and Windsurf.