Cursor
AI coding agent
Start new thread

Cursor or Claude Code?

by
•

I love . It's enabled me to build (vibe code) so many web apps, sites, extensions, and little things quickly that 1. bring me joy and 2. help me with work or realize personal projects.

However... I'm seeing a TON of movement around 's Claude Code. I haven't personally tried it but it's apparently insane (and can also be expensive?)

I'm curious. Should I switch? What are you currently using? Or do they both have their own use case. I right now like cursor because I can build directly in a GitHub repo or locally and it helps me learn my way around an IDE.

Looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts!

20K views
The thread debates whether developers should stick with Cursor or switch to Claude Code, with a loose consensus emerging: Claude Code often delivers higher-quality, first-try results, but Cursor excels for IDE-native control, visibility, and cost efficiency.
Several makers reported moving from Cursor to Claude Code for accuracy and fewer iterations—one even cites a ~30% reduction in rework across users (syedahmedz), who also notes a VS Code extension for Claude Code (follow-up). Others echo that Claude Code feels “next level” on the Claude Max plan (sharvin_zlife) and consistently strong in terminal-centric workflows (martin_rue, kyle_gani). Still, price and CLI heaviness are recurring drawbacks (steveb).
Cursor loyalists value its IDE diff view, GitHub repo flow, and hands-on learning, preferring a UI over terminal for control and understanding changes (hi_caicai; priyanka_gosai1). Some blend tools: run Claude Code inside VS Code/Cursor until hitting token limits, then fall back to Cursor (_tijs); use Cursor for planning and MCP tools, then Claude Code for execution (gyasi_sutton). Budget-minded alternatives like Cline + Gemini also surfaced (conduit_design, leandro_sardi).
Takeaway: If you prioritize accuracy, CLI integration, and faster iteration, Claude Code shines; if you value IDE-native control, visual diffs, and steady velocity on small projects, Cursor remains a great choice—many find the best setup is using both, depending on task complexity, budget, and workflow.
Summarized with AI

Add a comment

Replies

Best

Reading this thread a year later is fun because half the objections in it have quietly aged out. Claude Code stopped being terminal-only, the IDE extension shows proper diffs, and subscriptions now cover usage, so the monthly bill horror stories mostly belong to that era.

My split after a year of shipping client work with both: Claude Code does the heavy lifting. It rewrote 31 blog posts for my agency site, runs my SEO audits against Search Console, and handles multi-file changes without losing the plot. Cursor is what I open for small UI tweaks when I want to watch every change land, the visual diff is still the calmer experience.

The part nobody says enough: the editor choice matters less than the context you feed it. A well maintained project context file with your patterns and gotchas moved my output quality more than any tool switch. People compare agents for weeks, then run them in a repo with zero written conventions and wonder why the output is generic.

If you are deciding today, cheapest experiment is the base plan with Claude Code included, one real feature, one week. You will know which side you are on by Friday.

Building Lernex has pushed me away from choosing one permanent “winner.” The useful split is by task.

An IDE-native tool is excellent when I am exploring a surface, making a small visual change, or want to stay close to every diff. For repo-scale work—multi-file migrations, tests, documentation, debugging across logs and data, or a long implementation plan—I get more leverage from an agentic workflow such as Codex.

The comparison I care about is not lines generated or even first-try aesthetics. It is accepted changes, escaped regressions, time spent reviewing, and whether the result follows the architecture that already exists. A fast answer that creates three cleanup tasks is slower than a careful one.

So I would not “switch” in the absolute sense. I would keep the IDE experience and add a stronger agent for work where the unit of change is the system rather than the current file.

I use Claude Desktop for everything nowadays. It has both Code and Cowork in one place, which is super convinient. I don't even need IDE anymore, as I never touch code with my dirty hands.

As for Cursor, I'm allergic to it. Maybe it's interface which is too small and bloated, or constant fails on tool calling, or strange approval policies.

Claude Desktop to rule them all!

First
Previous
•••
567