Cursor vs GitHub Copilot
GitHub Copilot is an autocomplete tool: it predicts the next few lines from the current file and a small window of context. Cursor is an autonomous coding agent: it reads the whole codebase, plans multi-step changes, edits dozens of files, runs commands, tests its own work and iterates. The difference between them is architectural, not incremental.
At a glance
| Feature | Cursor | GitHub Copilot |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | AI-first code editor (VS Code fork) | IDE assistant with agent features |
| Primary interface | Agents Window plus a VS Code fork; also web, iOS, CLI and SDK | Extension inside an existing IDE |
| Tab completions | Best-in-class inline Tab completions | Yes — the original strength |
| Agent capability | Agent mode edits multiple files; Agents Window runs local, worktree, cloud and SSH agents in parallel | Agent features layered onto an autocomplete-era product |
| Models | Claude Fable 5, Opus 5 and Sonnet 5, Grok 4.5, Gemini 3.1 Pro, Cursor Composer 2.5, plus Auto model selection and BYOK | Multiple providers |
| MCP servers | Yes, configured in settings | Yes |
What can Cursor do that GitHub Copilot cannot?
Finish a task rather than a line. An agent reads the whole codebase, decides on a sequence of edits, applies them across dozens of files, runs the commands that verify them, and corrects itself when they fail. Copilot predicts the next few lines from what is on screen.
Both are useful; they are not substitutes. Autocomplete still saves keystrokes inside a function you are already writing.
Is GitHub Copilot still worth using?
For inline completion inside an IDE you already run, yes — that is what it was built for and it has the lowest adoption friction of anything here. What it does not do is take a described outcome and produce a reviewed, tested change across a repository. If that is the work, the comparison is not close.
The verdict
Choose Cursor if
- You want the AI to complete tasks, not lines
- Your changes routinely touch more than one file
- You want the agent to run tests and fix what it broke
Choose GitHub Copilot if
- You want inline completion in an IDE you already use, with no migration
- Your organisation has already standardised on it
What they cost
Cursor
- Hobby
- Limited Agent and Tab usage
- Pro
- Includes $20 of third-party API usage plus first-party capacity
- Pro+
- Includes $70 of third-party API usage plus first-party capacity
- Ultra
- Includes $400 of third-party API usage plus first-party capacity
Teams: Teams Standard $40/user/month ($32 billed annually); Teams Premium $120/user/month ($96 annually); Enterprise is custom
Public US list prices before tax, from the snapshot date above. Regional prices, negotiated contracts, mobile-store billing and promotions can differ — check the vendor page before purchasing.
Frequently asked questions
Is Cursor just GitHub Copilot with a different interface?
No. Copilot predicts the next few lines from the current file and a small context window. Cursor plans and executes multi-step changes across the codebase, runs commands and verifies its own work. The gap is in what the tool is architected to do, not in how it looks.
Do I have to migrate everything at once?
No. Cursor is a VS Code fork, so extensions, keybindings and settings carry over, and the two can coexist while you find out which tasks each one wins. The docs migration guide sets out a staged path.