AI Coding Assistants: A Comprehensive Comparison

The world of artificial intelligence (AI) has revolutionized the way we code, with numerous AI coding assistants available in the market. Two popular options are Cursor and GitHub Copilot, but how do they stack up against each other and other AI tools like ChatGPT and DeepSeek? In this article, we will delve into the features, pricing, and real-world performance of these AI coding assistants to help you decide which one is right for you.

Introduction to Cursor and GitHub Copilot

Comparing Cursor and GitHub Copilot The comparison between Cursor and GitHub Copilot is a pressing question for many developers. With both tools offering a range of plans and features, it can be challenging to decide which one is the best fit. As someone who has been using GitHub Copilot for over two years, I decided to give Cursor a try and see how it stacks up.

Pricing Comparison

When it comes to pricing, Cursor and GitHub Copilot have different approaches. Cursor's Pro Plan is double the price of GitHub Copilot's Pro Plan, which raises questions about whether the extra cost is justified. On paper, the two plans seem similar, with both offering unlimited completions and chats using similar AI models. However, Copilot provides access to the OpenAI o1 model, while Cursor limits users to just 10 o1-mini requests per day.

Features Breakdown

Exploring Cursor's Features Cursor is a prepackaged IDE forked from Visual Studio Code, with standout features like multi-line autocomplete, smart rewrites, and cursor prediction. These features are designed to improve coding speed and efficiency. Additionally, Cursor's chat functionality can pull context from codebases, web searches, and even screenshots. Another interesting feature is Composer, an AI agent that can take actions like running commands and refactoring code.

GitHub Copilot Features

GitHub Copilot matches Cursor in most areas, with the only exclusive feature being the ability to leverage screenshots. However, Copilot makes up for this with deeper integration into the GitHub ecosystem, offering features like code reviews and workspaces. Copilot also has extensions that make it possible to add support for specific frameworks or tools, such as the Mermaid Chart Extension. Furthermore, Copilot supports a wide range of IDEs, including VSCode, JetBrains IDEs, Xcode, Vim/NeoVim, and others.

Hands-On Experience with Cursor

Testing Cursor's Performance After trying Cursor for about a week, I found that the performance and features are comparable to Copilot. I wrote a few sample applications and tried to modify some Kubernetes manifests, and everything worked as expected. However, I didn't see anything that justifies paying double the price of Copilot, being locked into a single IDE, and losing deeper integration with the GitHub ecosystem.

ChatGPT and DeepSeek in the Mix

While ChatGPT and DeepSeek are not traditional AI coding assistants, they bring versatility to the table, helping with everything from architecture and documentation to planning romantic dinners. These tools can be used for writing code, but they also excel in other areas of software development. With the same models powering Cursor and Copilot chats, ChatGPT and DeepSeek can provide a similar experience, albeit with a bit more copy-pasting required to provide context.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the choice between Cursor and GitHub Copilot depends on your specific needs and preferences. If you want an affordable and flexible AI assistant deeply integrated into your IDE, GitHub Copilot is the way to go. However, if you're looking for something more versatile, it gets tricky. ChatGPT and DeepSeek are worth considering, especially with the new DeepSeek R1 changing the game. Ultimately, the decision comes down to what you value most in an AI coding assistant and what you're willing to pay for it.