Continue vs Cursor
A side-by-side comparison of Continue and Cursor to help you choose the right AI coding tool for your workflow.
Cursor
Cursor wins for individual and team productivity on multi-file work; Continue wins when org-wide model governance is the actual problem to solve.
You want an AI-native editor with repo-wide context, multi-file Composer refactors, and a near-zero switching cost from VS Code.
You need to standardize models and costs across a whole engineering org with mixed IDEs and want a shareable, auditable config as the control plane.
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Continue | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Free (BYO API key); Continue Hub free tier with team plans available | Free; Plus $8/mo; Premium $30/mo; Super $100/mo; Ultra $200/mo; Teams $30-$200/seat (legacy Pro $20/mo continues) |
| Our Rating | 3.5/5 | 4.1/5 |
| Category | code assistant | ide |
| Website | https://continue.dev | https://cursor.com |
Continue
Open-source AI coding assistant for VS Code and JetBrains whose real differentiator is one shareable config that standardizes the model stack across a whole team.
Cursor
AI code editor built on VS Code with Tab completions, a multi-file Agent, cloud agents, and Self-hosted Machines. Cursor's own Composer 2.5 and Grok models are included; Claude, GPT, and Gemini are billed at API list price on new plans.