vsref
Augment Code logoCursor logo

Augment Code vs Cursor

Augment Code (Context-engine coding platform for large codebases; now led by Cosmos cloud agents + Auggie CLI (also ide_extension: VS Code, JetBrains, Vim/Neovim chat). Brief seeded it as an IDE extension; the 2026 pricing page leads with "Try Cosmos". Flat team pricing (up to 50 seats, no per-seat charge) with a pooled $ usage balance.) and Cursor (AI IDE with CLI and cloud agents; ships its own Grok/Composer models. Acquired by SpaceX (completed 2026-08-14, per cursor.com/blog/joining-spacex); also segments terminal_agent, cloud_agent.) are AI coding agents platforms, priced from $20/mo and $20/mo respectively. Below: the bottom line, verified head-to-head facts, and real production costs.

AI coding agents platforms · 34 facts compared · all sourcedPricing verified Oct 2, 2026
Bottom line

Augment Code edges ahead by winning three use cases to Cursor's two, with two ties. Both start at $20/mo, but Augment Code includes $20/mo of usage across LLM, Context Engine and compute at that tier, which carries Beginners. It works inside VS Code itself as well as JetBrains IDEs, taking VS Code, and its Auggie CLI takes Terminal Workflows. Cursor wins Free Plans with its Hobby plan's limited Agent requests and wins Enterprise with a zero data retention option and SSO from its $40/user/mo Teams plan. Neither publishes local model support or a license, so those use cases tie.

Reviewed by vsref Editorialfacts verified Oct 2, 2026Methodology →

Augment Code is our pick for most teams. Start there, or weigh the use-case verdicts below.

Try Augment Code free →Try Cursor free →

If you sign up through links on this page, vsref may earn a commission; programs exist on both sides of most comparisons, and commissions never change verdicts. How we make money

Beginners
Augment Code
WINNER
Enterprise
Cursor
WINNER
Free Plans
Cursor
WINNER
Local Models
Tie
TIE
Open Source
Tie
TIE
Terminal Workflows
Augment Code
WINNER
VS Code
Augment Code
WINNER

Augment Code vs Cursor: head-to-head facts

FactAugment Code logoAugment CodeCursor logoCursor
How usage is metered$ usage pool + per-tokenOct 2$ usage pool + per-tokenOct 2
What the free plan allowsn/aHobby: 'Limited Agent requests', 'Access to Composer'Oct 2
Cheapest paid plan (monthly)$20Oct 2$20Oct 2
Top individual plan$100Oct 2$200Oct 2
Usage included at entry tier$20/mo of usage across LLM, Context Engine & computeOct 2n/a
Rate-limit windowmonthly $ allowanceOct 2monthly (pools reset with the billing cycle)Oct 2
Bring your own API keyn/atrueOct 2
Models availableClaude Fable 5.1, Claude Fable 5, Claude Opus 5 +23 moreOct 2Grok 4.7, Grok 4.6, Grok 4.5 +11 moreOct 2
Pick the model per task✓ YesOct 2✓ YesOct 2
Where it runsCosmos (cloud agents, web UI), Auggie CLI +6 moreOct 2Desktop IDE (VS Code fork), Agents window +10 moreOct 2
Autonomous multi-file edits✓ YesOct 2✓ YesOct 2
Runs terminal commands✓ YesOct 2✓ YesOct 2
Background / cloud agents✓ YesOct 2✓ YesOct 2
Opens PRs from issues✓ YesOct 2✓ YesOct 2
MCP support✓ YesOct 2✓ YesOct 2
Trains on your code?No training on paid plansOct 2Privacy Mode on: not used for training by Cursor or...Oct 2
Zero data retention optionn/a✓ YesOct 2
Self-hosted / VPC deployment✓ YesOct 2✓ YesOct 2
✓buyer-good  ·  ✗not available  ·  ◑gated or partial  ·  production cost ranges are our estimates, see our methodology.
Swipe → to compare both tools. Each value links its source and verified date.

Augment Code vs Cursor pricing: true cost at 3 usage tiers

Real monthly cost at 3 developer profiles: hobbyist (~5 h/week), full-time developer (~25 h/week of daily agent use), team of 5. Most vendors do not publish how much usage a plan covers, so the full-time row spans the cheapest to the top individual plan unless the vendor publishes its own guidance for daily users. Bring-your-own-key and open-source agents show the model bill you pay the provider, never $0.
~5 h/week of agent useHobbyist
Augment Code$20/mo
Cursor$20/mo
Side projects and evenings. Priced at each vendor's cheapest paid plan (annual billing where offered), the tier every vendor sells for light use.
~25 h/week, daily multi-file agent tasksFull-time developer
Augment CodeLOWEST$20-$100/mo
Cursor$60-$100/mo
Daily agent use. Most vendors do not publish how much usage a plan covers, so this shows the span from the cheapest to the top individual plan; where a vendor publishes its own guidance for daily agent users, that figure is used instead.
5 seatsTeam of 5
Augment CodeLOWEST$20/mo
Cursor$200/mo
Priced from each vendor's own team plan: per-seat prices x 5, flat team plans as published. A tool with no published team price shows that rather than a guess.

Augment Code vs Cursor: verdicts by use case

Beginners → Augment Code

Both tools start at $20/mo, so the entry price does not separate them. What a beginner gets for that money does: Augment Code includes $20/mo of usage across LLM, Context Engine and compute at the entry tier, a clear and predictable allowance, while Cursor does not publish its entry-tier usage. Both offer checkpoints and rollback for undoing a bad agent run. Cursor's Hobby plan offers limited Agent requests and access to Composer, a useful way to try it, but a published, predictable allowance matters more for keeping the bill under control.

Enterprise → Cursor

Both tools address training on company code: Augment Code states no training on paid plans, and Cursor says code is not used for training with Privacy Mode on. Both offer a self-hosted or VPC deployment, SOC 2 and admin audit logs. The differences favor Cursor. It publishes a zero data retention option, which Augment Code does not. Its SAML/OIDC SSO is available from the Teams plan at $40/user/mo, while Augment Code reserves SSO, OIDC and SCIM for Enterprise only.

Free Plans → Cursor

What a free tier actually allows decides this, and only Cursor publishes one: its Hobby plan includes limited Agent requests and access to Composer. Augment Code does not publish a free tier. Cursor also supports bringing your own API key, which Augment Code does not publish, so you can keep working on your own provider account. Both tools' cheapest paid plans cost $20/mo, and neither publishes local model support.

Local Models → Tie

Neither tool publishes local model support, its supported model providers, or an open-source license, which are the facts that decide this use case. Cursor supports bringing your own API key, but that routes requests to a hosted provider rather than running models on your own machine, so it does not close the gap. Augment Code offers a long model list, including Claude Fable 5.1, and Cursor offers Grok 4.7 among others, all hosted. Developers who need offline, on-laptop inference cannot confirm it with either tool.

Open Source → Tie

Neither tool publishes a license, supported model providers, local model support, GitHub stars or a separate hosted option, so there is nothing to put one ahead for teams that want to read, fork or self-host the agent code. Both do offer a self-hosted or VPC deployment, but that is a vendor deployment option rather than open source code. Teams with an open-source requirement should treat both as closed until a license is published.

Terminal Workflows → Augment Code

Where the agent runs matters most for shell-first work. Augment Code lists the Auggie CLI among its surfaces, next to Cosmos cloud agents, plus six more. Cursor leads with its desktop IDE, a VS Code fork, and an Agents window, plus ten more, without a CLI among the surfaces shown. Both run terminal commands, both offer background or cloud agents, both support MCP, and both read project rules files such as AGENTS.md. With those level, Augment Code's named CLI is the edge.

VS Code → Augment Code

Editor support decides this. Augment Code works inside VS Code itself, plus JetBrains IDEs and Vim/Neovim. Cursor runs in its own editor, a desktop IDE built as a VS Code fork, so it suits developers willing to switch to the fork. Both make autonomous multi-file edits, both offer checkpoints and rollback, and both index the codebase. Augment Code also publishes $20/mo of included usage at its entry tier, which Cursor does not publish.

Augment Code vs Cursor: common questions

Is Augment Code cheaper than Cursor?+

At the entry tier they match: Augment Code and Cursor both start at $20/mo. Higher up, Augment Code costs less. Its top individual plan is $100/mo, while Cursor's is $200/mo. For teams, Augment Code lists a Team plan price of $20, and Cursor's Teams plan is $40/user/mo.

Augment Code vs Cursor: which is better for beginners?+

Augment Code has a slight edge for beginners who want a predictable bill. Both start at $20/mo, but Augment Code includes $20/mo of usage across LLM, Context Engine and compute at that tier, while Cursor does not publish its entry-tier usage. Cursor's Hobby plan offers limited Agent requests for trying it out. Both offer checkpoints and rollback.

Augment Code vs Cursor team plan pricing: which costs less?+

Augment Code lists a Team plan price of $20, while Cursor's Teams plan is $40/user/mo. Both also offer an Enterprise plan through sales.

Which has the cheaper top plan, Augment Code or Cursor?+

Augment Code's top individual plan is $100/mo. Cursor's top individual plan is $200/mo.

Is Augment Code or Cursor better for SSO?+

Cursor offers SAML/OIDC SSO starting on its Teams plan at $40/user/mo. Augment Code offers SSO, OIDC and SCIM on Enterprise only.

How do Augment Code and Cursor charge for usage beyond the plan?+

Augment Code bills pay-as-you-go at the same rates, with LLM tokens charged at provider rates. Cursor offers on-demand usage at the same per-token API rates. Augment Code's allowance is a monthly dollar amount, and Cursor's usage pools reset with the billing cycle.

Does Augment Code or Cursor train on my code?+

Augment Code states no training on paid plans. Cursor says that with Privacy Mode on, code is not used for training. Cursor also offers a zero data retention option.

Which models can I use in Augment Code and Cursor?+

Augment Code offers Claude Fable 5.1, Claude Fable 5 and Claude Opus 5 among many others, defaulting to your last selection or organization default. Cursor offers Grok 4.7, Grok 4.6 and Grok 4.5 among others, with an Auto router by default. Both let you pick the model per task.

Can Augment Code and Cursor review pull requests?+

Yes. Augment Code offers code review, and Cursor offers Bugbot PR review. Both can also open pull requests from issues.

Best Augment Code alternatives →Best Cursor alternatives →

When neither is right: browse all AI coding agents platforms →

Try Augment Code free →Try Cursor free →

If you sign up through links on this page, vsref may earn a commission; programs exist on both sides of most comparisons, and commissions never change verdicts. How we make money