Cursor Review (2026) — The AI Code Editor, Tested
The AI coding tool that felt like a step change for many developers. Codebase-aware edits and chat are genuinely productive; watch the cost and always review its changes.
The Good
- Deep codebase-aware context
- Strong multi-file edits
- Familiar VS Code experience
- Fast, in-flow chat
The Bad
- Can get pricey with heavy use
- Still writes wrong code confidently
- Another editor to adopt
Overview
Cursor is an AI-first code editor built as a fork of VS Code. It centres the experience on chat, codebase-aware context and multi-file edits rather than inline completion alone.
What it's good at
Context. Cursor can reason across your whole codebase, make coordinated edits over multiple files, and answer questions about unfamiliar code — all inside a familiar VS Code interface. For refactors and feature work, it can be a genuine step up.
Where it falls short
Heavy use can get expensive, and like all these tools it still produces confident-but-wrong code you must review. It's also another editor to migrate to if you're settled elsewhere.
Should you use it?
Developers who want AI woven through the whole editing workflow — not just autocomplete — should try it. Keep reviewing its output, especially on anything security-sensitive.
Pricing
- Hobby — $0: Limited AI usage, Core editor
- Pro — $20/mo: Higher limits, Latest models, Faster requests
Who it’s for
- Refactoring across files
- Understanding a new codebase
- Writing features from a prompt
- Fixing failing tests
FAQ
Is Cursor just VS Code with AI?
It’s a VS Code fork, so it feels familiar, but the AI is built into the core workflow rather than bolted on.
How is it different from Copilot?
Cursor leans into codebase-wide context and multi-file edits from chat; Copilot centres on inline completion inside your existing editor.