Cline vs Cursor
A side-by-side comparison of Cline and Cursor to help you choose the right AI coding tool for your workflow.
Cursor
Cursor's editor-native context model wins for most developers doing real multi-file work, but Cline is the principled choice when open-source auditability or BYO-key billing are non-negotiable.
You do frequent multi-file refactors inside an editor-native AI loop and want predictable onboarding with your existing VS Code extensions.
You need an auditable, forkable Apache 2.0 agent loop inside VS Code and prefer paying your model provider directly with no closed-source platform in the middle.
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Cline | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Free (BYO API key), pay model provider directly | Free; Plus $8/mo; Premium $30/mo; Super $100/mo; Ultra $200/mo; Teams $30-$200/seat (legacy Pro $20/mo continues) |
| Our Rating | 4.4/5 | 4.1/5 |
| Category | code assistant | ide |
| Website | https://cline.bot | https://cursor.com |
Cline
Open-source VS Code coding agent with a per-step human approval gate and bring-your-own-key billing. The Apache 2.0 license and direct provider billing are the whole reason to pick it over a closed IDE fork.
Cursor
AI code editor built on VS Code with Tab completions, a multi-file Agent, cloud agents, and Self-hosted Machines. Cursor's own Composer 2.5 and Grok models are included; Claude, GPT, and Gemini are billed at API list price on new plans.