Continue vs Cursor

Auto-updated comparison · last refreshed September 3, 2026

TL;DR

ContinueCursor
Typevscode-extensionide-fork
Vendoropen sourceAnysphere
PricingFree tier (OSS extension, BYO API keys)Free tier · Pro $20/month · Business $40/user
AutocompleteYesYes
Agent modeYesYes
MCP supportYesYes
Local modelsYesYes
Self-hostedYesNo
Codebase indexingYesYes
Team featuresYesYes

Where Continue wins

Where Cursor wins

Weaknesses

Continue: config-heavy; slower to add new features than Cursor

Cursor: can lose context on branch switch; fast-request quota depletes quickly

Best for

Pick Continue if you are teams that need OSS auditable AI tooling, or local LLM users.

Pick Cursor if you are experienced devs, or macOS users, or MCP-heavy workflows.

Try Cursor

FAQ

Is Continue more expensive than Cursor?

Free tier (OSS extension, BYO API keys) vs Free tier · Pro $20/month · Business $40/user. Compare the Pro tiers first if you're a solo dev; Business/Enterprise only matters for teams.

Do Continue and Cursor use the same AI models?

Continue supports: any via API. Cursor supports: claude-sonnet-4-6, claude-opus-4-7, gpt-4.1, gpt-5, gemini-2.5-pro. Most modern tools default to Claude Sonnet 4.6 in 2026.

Can I use both?

Yes. They don't conflict at the file level. Some devs use one for autocomplete and one for agent work.

Related comparisons

Best Continue and Cursor pairings by language