Cursor vs Sourcegraph Cody
Cursor
Quick Verdict
Cursor excels at ai-native development and code refactoring with a score of 95/100. Cursor represents the future of coding environments, built specifically for AI-powered development.
Sourcegraph Cody
Quick Verdict
Sourcegraph Cody excels at enterprise codebases and code search with a score of 89/100. Cody excels at understanding large, complex codebases across multiple repositories.
Technical Specifications
| Feature | Cursor | Sourcegraph Cody |
|---|---|---|
| Core AI Model(s) | Supports frontier models including Claude Sonnet 4, OpenAI o3-pro, OpenAI GPT-4.1, Gemini 2.5 Pro, and Claude Opus 4. It also utilizes custom, purpose-built models for features like its native autocomplete, 'Tab'. | Not specified |
| Context Window | The Pro plan provides access to maximum context windows. | Not specified |
| Deployment Options | Cursor is a downloadable desktop application for macOS, Windows, and Linux. For teams, it offers an Enterprise plan with SAML/OIDC SSO and SCIM seat management for centralized administration. | Not specified |
| Offline Mode | Cursor has offline capabilities. A GitHub repository provides a guide for offline activation, enabling all features to work without a cloud or login requirement in airgapped systems. However, some users have reported difficulty using agent mode specifically in an offline setting. | Not specified |
Core Features Comparison
Cursor Features
- AI-powered code completion and generation
- Multi-file code editing with AI chat
- Advanced code understanding and refactoring
- Integrated terminal and debugging tools
Sourcegraph Cody Features
- Deep codebase context and understanding
- AI-powered code search and navigation
- Multi-repository code intelligence
- Enterprise-grade security and deployment options
Pricing & Value Analysis
| Aspect | Cursor | Sourcegraph Cody |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing URL | View Cursor Pricing | View Sourcegraph Cody Pricing |
| Overall Score | 95/100 | 89/100 |
| Best For | AI-Native Development, Code Refactoring, Multi-file Projects | Enterprise Codebases, Code Search, Large-scale Projects |
Best Use Cases
Cursor Excels At
- Large-scale refactoring across multiple files with AI understanding the full codebase context
- Building complex features by describing functionality in natural language and letting AI generate the implementation
- Code reviews and debugging with AI analyzing relationships between files and suggesting improvements
Sourcegraph Cody Excels At
- Enterprise codebase navigation and understanding across multiple repositories and microservices
- Technical support and troubleshooting by analyzing complex codebases and providing contextual solutions
- Code modernization and migration projects with deep understanding of legacy system dependencies
Performance & Integration
| Category | Cursor | Sourcegraph Cody | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| IDE Support | Cursor is a standalone code editor that is a fork of VS Code. This allows users to import their existing VS Code extensions, themes, and keybindings with a single click. | Multiple IDEs supported | Tie |
| Community | Active community | Limited community | Tie |
| Data Richness | Comprehensive | Basic | Cursor |
| Overall Score | 95/100 | 89/100 | Cursor |
The Bottom Line
Both Cursor and Sourcegraph Cody are capable AI coding tools, but they serve different needs. Cursor scores higher (95/100 vs 89/100) and excels in ai-native development and code refactoring. The choice depends on your specific workflow, team size, and technical requirements.
Choose Cursor if: you prioritize ai-native development and code refactoring and want the higher-rated option (95/100).
Choose Sourcegraph Cody if: you prioritize enterprise codebases and code search and don't mind a slightly lower score for specialized features.