Cursor vs. Windsurf

What happens when two innovative AI coding tools face the same challenge? I decided to find out, and here’s what it was like, first-hand.

Like many developers, I explored new tools with a Google search, a promising Reddit thread, and a fresh cup of coffee. I stumbled upon Cursor and Windsurf (formerly known as Codeium). The two up-and-coming AI-powered code editors promise to transform how we write code.

This is not a long-term review. It’s a snapshot. A developer’s diary of discovery. And while your mileage may vary, this happened in my first real test run.

So if, like me, you’re curious to dip your feet into AI-assisted coding, consider this your starting point. You’ll see how I explored both tools, tested prompts, faced bumps, and uncovered delightful surprises.

By the end, I hope you’ll feel ready to try your AI-assisted build, or even better, build alongside me, or at least walk away with a clearer sense of what these tools can and can’t do.

Cursor and Windsurf: AI-powered IDEs for faster coding#

Cursor and Windsurf integrate large language models (LLMs) into the coding workflow. They aim to:

Autocomplete code based on natural language.
Understand the existing project context.
Refactor, explain, or debug code.
Act as a co-pilot or agent for developers.

Cursor builds on top of VS Code with deep Copilot-like integrations, while Windsurf emphasizes a clean, browser-first interface with visible AI diffingThe AI shows you exactly what parts of your code it’s changing, line by line, and gives you a clear choice to accept, reject, or edit those changes. and commands.

The Habit Tracker Project#

I decided to test both Cursor and Windsurf for my project.

The goal was to build a lightweight, interactive, streak-aware habit tracker. I wanted to see which one made me feel more productive, not just by generating good code, but also by collaborating with me.

Setup and installations#

Both Cursor and Windsurf were easy to start, but not equally smooth.

I tested both tools in June 2025 on a MacBook Pro (M1, Apple Silicon).

These tools are under active development, so depending on when you read this, some behaviors or features might have changed (hopefully even better!).

Cursor took slightly longer to set up, but the environment was familiar and VS Code-esque once in.

One of Windsurf’s standout UI features is its cascade panel on the right. Each time you prompt the AI, it logs that interaction as a visual card, showing the affected files, proposed code changes, and explanations like Cursor’s AI panel.

User Interface#

Both tools felt familiar, resembling modern, minimal code editors, but they subtly shaped the experience:

Cursor had a more polished and familiar editor feel, like a natural evolution of VS Code. That makes sense because both Cursor and Windsurf are built as forks of the open-source VS Code project. The Cursor stays much closer to the original experience, making it feel like a true coding-first IDE with smart AI enhancements. Its agent lives in a chat panel and can be summoned to generate, refactor, or explain code across files.
Windsurf, also built on the VS Code base, takes more liberties with its UI and user experience. Instead of adopting the full VS Code UI, Windsurf overlays AI-first features (diffs, cascade panel, test mode), trading some extension compatibility for more flexibility and control. As a result, it feels less like VS Code and more like a fresh, AI-first editor.

The table below summarises the initial experience:

Building the Habit Tracker Project#

I gave both tools the same prompts. To briefly give you an idea:

Prompt 1#

Create a basic habit tracker web app using HTML, CSS, and JavaScript.

The app should allow the user to:
- Add a habit by typing the name and clicking “Add”.
- See a list of habits.
- For each habit, allow checking off the current day (like a checkbox or button).
- Track streak count (number of consecutive days checked).

Start with a clean UI structure and make it visually clean and simple.

Both tools tackled this confidently. Cursor and Windsurf generated a solid three-file project (HTML, CSS, JS) with a working habit tracker UI and functional JavaScript logic.

Below are some code snippets that highlight the key logic differences or implementation style, along with some of my observations:

Habit completion logic by Cursor#

Both allowed me to run and test the app right inside the editor—Windsurf even gave me a handy terminal command to start the project.

Cursor: The code generated by Cursor seemed clear, beginner-friendly, and minimal. However, it could be better if we focus on understanding the core logic. Its approach concentrated on the essential features without the extra bells and whistles seen in Windsurf’s version.

Windsurf: The code generated by Windsurf seemed more feature-rich, ambitious, and extensible. The most illustrative part of its logic was the function for toggling a habit’s completion status. Slightly more complex under the hood, but it pays off if you’re building a full-featured habit app.

Pleasant surprises

Both tools analyzed my writing as I typed and often suggested context-aware completions.
1. The Cursor, built on VS Code, behaved much like GitHub Copilot—it showed ghost text inline suggestions under my cursor.
2. While not always showing live inline completions, Windsurf offered thoughtful suggestions after prompts and highlighted changes with an “Accept or Reject” option. That visual diffing made it easy to stay in control, especially when editing existing code. As I started typing, both tools analyzed the context of my writing and suggested completions.
Both Cursor and Windsurf gave visible control over AI-generated changes. In their ways, they highlighted generated code and offered “Accept/Reject” overlays for changes. That level of transparency was helpful, especially for fine control.

So far? Comparable. But things would get interesting when logic-heavy features came into play.

Prompt 2#

Add logic to calculate streaks for each habit.
Each habit should store:
A streak count (number of consecutive days completed).
The date it was last marked complete.
The streak should increase only if:
Today is the next consecutive day after the last completed date.
If a day is skipped, reset the streak to 0.
Also, update the UI to show the current streak next to each habit.

This was where the cracks started to show.

Cursor handled it with quiet confidence. It implemented streak tracking logic that:

Starts the streak at 1.
Increments only if the previous check-in was exactly one day ago.
Resets if a day is skipped.

It gave a brief but clear explanation. The logic worked (though not visually obvious at first), and when I pushed further, it offered improvement ideas.

Date difference logic by Cursor#

function getDateDiffInDays(date1, date2) {
 // date1, date2: 'YYYY-MM-DD'
 const d1 = new Date(date1);
 const d2 = new Date(date2);
 // Ignore time zone differences
 d1.setHours(0,0,0,0);
 d2.setHours(0,0,0,0);
 return Math.round((d1 - d2) / (1000 * 60 * 60 * 24));
}
function checkHabit(idx) {
 const habit = habits[idx];
 const today = todayStr();
 if (habit.lastChecked === today) return; // Already checked today
  if (habit.lastChecked) {
    const diff = getDateDiffInDays(today, habit.lastChecked);
    if (diff === 1) {
    habit.streak += 1;
    } else if (diff > 1) {
      habit.streak = 1; // Missed a day, reset streak
    }
    
  } else {
    habit.streak = 1; // First time checking
    }
  habit.lastChecked = today;
  saveHabits();
  renderHabits();
}

Cursor’s streak logic

// Toggle habit completion
function toggleHabitCompletion(id) {
    const habit = habits.find(h => h.id === id);
    // ...
    const wasCompletedToday = habit.lastCompleted === today;
    
    if (wasCompletedToday) {
        // ... logic for undoing completion
        // Recalculate streak after undoing
        updateStreak(habit); 
    } else {
        // Complete for today
        const previousLastCompleted = habit.lastCompleted;
        habit.lastCompleted = today;
        // ...
        
        // Update streak based on previous completion
        if (!previousLastCompleted) {
            habit.streak = 1;
        } else {
            const yesterday = addDays(today, -1);
            if (previousLastCompleted === yesterday) {
                // Consecutive day
                habit.streak++;
            } else {
                // Streak broken, reset to 1
                habit.streak = 1;
            }
        }
    }
    // ...
}

Windsurf’s streak logic

Overall observation:

Cursor: Cursor successfully implemented the core logic quickly with beginner-friendly clarity.
Windsurf: Windsurf eventually implemented everything too—with a few nudges—but gave you more power once it was there.

Prompt 3#

Add a history view for each habit.
Store the date in a history array each time a habit is marked complete.
Below each habit, show a toggle button: “Show History”.
When clicked, display all the past dates when the habit was marked complete.
Optional: Group them by week or month for better readability.

This time, Cursor successfully implemented the feature (toggle, render, and style) on the first try. Windsurf followed—but again, it took a couple of nudges. When creating a history view, Windsurf already had a history array in its data model, which should have given it a head start. However, the generated code for this prompt failed to implement the requested feature.

Cursor’s habit tracker app#

Also, later when I asked in Windsurf’s AI chat how I could test if the streak logic updated for future (or past dates), it pleasantly surprised me.

It added a “Test Mode”—a date picker to simulate different days. This was genuinely clever and helped verify the logic much more intuitively than Cursor’s workaround (which required manually changing system time or editing localStorage). However, when prompted, Cursor eventually developed the “Mark for Date” feature.

The test mode feature is used to test the streak logic.

function getLast7Days() {
  const days = [];
  const today = new Date();
  for (let i = 6; i >= 0; i--) {
    const d = new Date(today);
    d.setDate(today.getDate() - i);
    days.push(d.toISOString().slice(0, 10));
  }
  return days;
}
function renderHabits() {
  // ...
  habits.forEach((habit, idx) => {
    // ...
    // 7-day progress chart
    const chartDiv = document.createElement('div');
    chartDiv.className = 'progress-chart';
    const last7 = getLast7Days();
    const historySet = new Set(habit.history || []); // Efficient lookup
    chartDiv.innerHTML = last7.map(date => {
      const done = historySet.has(date);
      const day = new Date(date).toLocaleDateString(undefined, { weekday: 'short' });
      return `<span class="chart-day ${done ? 'done' : ''}" title="${date}">${day}</span>`;
    }).join('');
    li.appendChild(chartDiv);
  // ...
  });
}

Per-habit-7-day view by cursor

// Update the progress chart
function updateProgressChart() {
  const ctx = document.getElementById('progressChart').getContext('2d');
  const dates = getLastSevenDays();
  const completedCounts = new Array(7).fill(0);
  
  // Count completed habits for each day
  habits.forEach(habit => {
    habit.history.forEach(date => {
      const index = dates.indexOf(date);
      if (index !== -1) {
        completedCounts[index]++;
      }
    });
  });
  
  // Chart.js configuration and rendering
  progressChart = new Chart(ctx, {
    type: 'bar',
    data: { /* ... */ },
    options: { /* ... */ }
  });
}

Global Chart.js implementation by Windsurf

Lessons from the experiment#

This test wasn’t about winning or losing. It was about discovering the personality of each tool through a shared challenge.

Cursor is…#

A quiet but powerful partner. It understood logic-heavy tasks easily, explained decisions succinctly, and required minimal nudging. It didn’t always over-design the UI, but it got the logic right, consistently.

Cursor may be best suited for developers who value strong reasoning and want to move quickly, such as solo builders or those with clear specs.

Windsurf is…#

A more talkative copilot. It was helpful, showed its work, and sometimes surprised me with creative flourishes (like test mode). But it needed more hand-holding with complex logic and misfired a few times before settling into rhythm.

It’s better suited to collaborative developers who enjoy shaping the outcome or beginners who appreciate seeing AI suggestions with clear choices.

Final word (for now)#

This review captures my first-time project-based experience using Cursor and Windsurf to build a slightly advanced habit tracker. These insights are not definitive—future projects may reveal more nuances or completely reverse some impressions.

But one thing’s clear: both tools represent a fascinating evolution of how we code.

Cursor is already helping me focus more on what I want to build than how I’ll build it. With its visible AI interactions, Windsurf feels like a sandbox—sometimes messy, sometimes magical.

I’ll keep both in my toolkit — and I’m excited to see how they grow.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main difference between Cursor and Windsurf?

The main difference lies in their core philosophy and workflow. Cursor is designed as a deeply integrated, “always-on” coding partner that builds a comprehensive understanding of your project over time. It operates as a VS Code fork and excels at automatically maintaining cross-file context. In contrast, Windsurf (formerly Codeium) functions more like a powerful, “agentic” assistant in a chat-and-preview flow. While also built on VS Code, it often requires more explicit prompts to perform complex, multi-file tasks and shines in generating code and workflows in concentrated bursts.

How do the pricing and features of Cursor and Windsurf compare?

Cursor and Windsurf offer free and paid tiers, but their pricing and feature sets are tailored to their different approaches.

Cursor: Its Pro plan is typically priced around $20 monthly (as of Jun 2025). This tier offers more “fast” AI requests, access to more advanced models like GPT-4, and features geared toward individual developers and small teams who need deep, ongoing contextual support.
Windsurf: Its Pro plan is often slightly cheaper, around $15 per month (as of Jun 2025). Windsurf’s paid features focus on enhancing its agentic capabilities through “Cascade,” offering powerful code generation, automated workflows, and robust chat-based interactions.

Ultimately, the better value depends on your workflow. Cursor’s features may justify the cost if you need a deeply embedded AI partner for a complex project. Windsurf might be the more cost-effective choice if you prefer a powerful, on-demand code generation and workflow automation tool.

Do Cursor and Windsurf store or share my code?

Both tools run locally as VS Code extensions, so your code stays on your machine. However, always check each tool’s privacy policy for data collection practices, especially if using cloud-enhanced features or signing into accounts.

Can Cursor or Windsurf handle multi-file projects effectively?

Yes, but Cursor handles multi-file logic more gracefully thanks to its persistent workspace and strong context memory within VS Code. Windsurf also supports multi-file projects, but may need more prompting or manual guidance when handling complex cross-file logic.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main difference between Cursor and Windsurf?

The main difference lies in their core philosophy and workflow. Cursor is designed as a deeply integrated, “always-on” coding partner that builds a comprehensive understanding of your project over time. It operates as a VS Code fork and excels at automatically maintaining cross-file context. In contrast, Windsurf (formerly Codeium) functions more like a powerful, “agentic” assistant in a chat-and-preview flow. While also built on VS Code, it often requires more explicit prompts to perform complex, multi-file tasks and shines in generating code and workflows in concentrated bursts.

How do the pricing and features of Cursor and Windsurf compare?

Cursor and Windsurf offer free and paid tiers, but their pricing and feature sets are tailored to their different approaches.

Cursor: Its Pro plan is typically priced around $20 monthly (as of Jun 2025). This tier offers more “fast” AI requests, access to more advanced models like GPT-4, and features geared toward individual developers and small teams who need deep, ongoing contextual support.
Windsurf: Its Pro plan is often slightly cheaper, around $15 per month (as of Jun 2025). Windsurf’s paid features focus on enhancing its agentic capabilities through “Cascade,” offering powerful code generation, automated workflows, and robust chat-based interactions.

Ultimately, the better value depends on your workflow. Cursor’s features may justify the cost if you need a deeply embedded AI partner for a complex project. Windsurf might be the more cost-effective choice if you prefer a powerful, on-demand code generation and workflow automation tool.

Do Cursor and Windsurf store or share my code?

Both tools run locally as VS Code extensions, so your code stays on your machine. However, always check each tool’s privacy policy for data collection practices, especially if using cloud-enhanced features or signing into accounts.

Can Cursor or Windsurf handle multi-file projects effectively?

Yes, but Cursor handles multi-file logic more gracefully thanks to its persistent workspace and strong context memory within VS Code. Windsurf also supports multi-file projects, but may need more prompting or manual guidance when handling complex cross-file logic.

Feature	Cursor	Windsurf
Speed and Performance	Slightly heavier on start	Faster initial load
UX and Familiarity	Familiar VS Code interface	Custom minimalist UI
Context Awareness	Deep context understanding via persistent workspace + VS Code extension base	Strong prompt memory and visual previews, though less consistent in logic handling
Editing Workflow	Inline + commands	AI-suggested diffs + control
Preview and Testing	Browser output, DevTools	Built-in terminal + test UI

Plans	Windsurf	Cursor
Free	5 premium model user prompt credits at $0/month	Pro two-week trial, limited agent requests, limited tab completion at 0$/month
Pro Trial	500 premium model user prompt credit credits at $15/month	Unlimited agent requests, tab completions, and background agents at $20/month
Pro Ultimate	Infinite premium model user prompt credits at $60/month	Everything in Pro, plus: 20x usage on OpenAI, Claude, Gemini, Grok models at $200/month

Criteria	Cursor	Windsurf
Installation	Smooth local desktop installation	Smooth local desktop installation
LLM used (for the project)	claude-4-sonnet	SWE-lite-1
First feel	Familiar editor, deep IDE integration	Lightweight, clean interface

Action	Shortcut (Mac)	Shortcut (Windows/Linux)
Open the command palette	`Cmd + P`	`Ctrl + P`
OpenAI chat	`Cmd + L`	`Ctrl + L`
Accept AI suggestion (ghost text)	`Tab`	`Tab`
Format the current file	`Shift + Option + F`	`Shift + Alt + F`
Show all commands (AI + system)	`Cmd + Shift + P`	`Ctrl + Shift + P`
Global search across files	`Cmd + Shift + F`	`Ctrl + Shift + F`
Multi-cursor selection	`Option + Click`	`Alt + Click`
Toggle terminal	`Cmd + J`	`Ctrl + J`

Action	Shortcut (Mac)	Shortcut (Windows/Linux)
Accept all AI changes	`Cmd + Enter`	`Ctrl + Enter`
AI quick action (context menu)	Right-click on the code	Right-click on the code
Open the command palette	`Cmd + K` then `P`	`Ctrl + K` then `P`
Toggle terminal	`Cmd + J`	`Ctrl + J`

Cursor vs. Windsurf

Cursor and Windsurf: AI-powered IDEs for faster coding#