Comparison

GitHub Copilot vs Cursor

A side-by-side look at GitHub Copilot and Cursor, using the details in each tool profile.

Quick take

Choose GitHub Copilot — best for: teams already on GitHub who want AI in their existing editor without switching tools. Choose Cursor — best for: heavy agent-driven work across a whole codebase.

GitHub Copilot vs Cursor at a glance

Criteria	GitHub Copilot	Cursor
Category	AI Coding Assistants	AI Coding Assistants
Best for	Teams already on GitHub who want AI in their existing editor without switching tools.	Heavy agent-driven work across a whole codebase.
Pricing model	Subscription	Subscription
Free plan	Yes	Yes
Free trial	Yes	Yes
API available	Not verified	No
Platforms	VS Code, Visual Studio, JetBrains IDEs, Neovim, Xcode, Eclipse, Zed, github.com, GitHub Mobile, GitHub CLI (40+ surfaces)	macOS, Windows, Linux (standalone editor) Cursor CLI
Key features	Inline code completions and Next Edit Suggestions (unmetered on every plan) Copilot Chat in IDE and on github.com Agent mode for multi-file changes Copilot code review on pull requests Copilot Workspace coding agent that opens PRs from issues	Composer/Agent for autonomous multi-file changes full-codebase indexing and semantic search Tab completion model tuned for multi-line edits inline edit (Cmd+K) Bugbot automated code review model selection across frontier providers
Advantages	Lowest entry price at $10 and a real free tier works in your existing editor so there is no migration unmetered completions mean everyday autocomplete never costs extra unmatched GitHub-native workflows (PR review, issue-to-PR)	The strongest agent experience among IDE-based tools codebase indexing makes context handling noticeably better than extension-based assistants migration from VS Code is effectively free Tab model for multi-line edits is excellent.
Limitations	The agent is less capable than Cursor's or Claude Code's on large multi-file tasks the June 2026 shift to credit billing makes costs less predictable for heavy users premium model access is now metered chat context handling is weaker than AI-native editors.	Twice the entry price of GitHub Copilot requires switching editors, which some teams will not do usage-credit accounting is opaque and users report unexpected charges (Trustpilot ratings reflect billing complaints) no free tier of real substance

Pricing notes

GitHub Copilot

Free $0 with a monthly allowance of completions and chat. Pro $10/user/mo. Pro+ $39/user/mo. Business $19/user/mo. Enterprise $39/user/mo. As of 1 June 2026 all plans moved to usage-based billing via GitHub AI Credits, calculated on token consumption (input, output, cached); code completions and Next Edit Suggestions remain unmetered on every plan. Free for verified students, teachers and maintainers of popular open-source projects.

Cursor

Hobby free with limited completions and requests. Pro $20/mo. Pro+ $60/mo. Ultra $200/mo. Business $40/user/mo with admin controls, centralised billing, SSO and privacy mode enforcement. Enterprise custom. Higher tiers buy larger included usage pools; heavy use beyond the pool is metered or throttled.

Prices change often. Confirm on the official pricing pages: GitHub Copilot ↗ · Cursor ↗

Frequently asked questions

What is the main difference between GitHub Copilot and Cursor?

GitHub Copilot: The most widely distributed AI coding assistant. Cursor: AI-native code editor built as a VS Code fork, designed around agentic multi-file editing rather than line completion.

When should I choose GitHub Copilot over Cursor?

GitHub Copilot is listed as best for: teams already on GitHub who want AI in their existing editor without switching tools. Cursor is listed as best for: heavy agent-driven work across a whole codebase.

Do GitHub Copilot and Cursor have a free plan?

GitHub Copilot: Yes. Cursor: Yes. Check each official pricing page, as plans change.

Read the full profiles

All comparisons →