Cursor and Google Antigravity are both agent-first IDEs built on the VS Code base. Both run agents that can plan, write code, and execute commands across your project. Both have been called "the future of coding" in the same month.
But the way they distribute control between you and the agent is fundamentally different — and that difference determines which one fits your workflow.
The Control Model
Cursor 3 is an AI-first editor. The VS Code environment stays familiar; powerful code assistance layers on top of it. Cursor 3's new Agents Window makes agents a first-class feature — you manage tasks, agents execute them — but you remain the active developer. The cloud handoff feature lets you start a task locally and push it to a cloud agent when you close your laptop, so it keeps running.
Google Antigravity flips the model. You become the task manager; agents do the coding. Manager View gives you a Mission Control surface where multiple agents work in parallel across separate workspaces — one refactoring the backend, another splitting React components, a third running tests. A full Chromium browser subagent can visually verify UI output. Planning Mode externalises agent reasoning as artifacts so you can intervene at decision points; Fast Mode executes without pause for low-risk tasks.
The split: Cursor keeps you coding with agent support. Antigravity asks you to stop coding and start orchestrating.
Feature Comparison
| Cursor 3 | Antigravity | |
|---|---|---|
| Base | VS Code | VS Code |
| Parallel agents | No (sequential) | Yes — Manager View |
| Browser subagent | No | Yes — full Chromium |
| Cloud handoff | Yes — continue after laptop closes | No |
| Planning Mode | No | Yes — Artifact-based reasoning |
| Fast Mode | No | Yes — no-pause execution |
| Voice input | No | No |
| Works with existing setup | Largely yes | Replaces editor entirely |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Cursor 3 | Antigravity (Gemini 3.1 Pro) |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-Bench Verified | Top-3 (exact score not published) | 76.2% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Top-3 (alongside Antigravity and Kiro) | Top-3 |
Antigravity publishes its 76.2% SWE-Bench Verified score prominently — for context, Devin scored 13.86% at its launch. Cursor has not published an equivalent SWE-Bench number for Cursor 3, citing that benchmark design doesn't capture their agentic architecture's strengths. Both tools appear in the Terminal-Bench 2.0 top-3, suggesting competitive raw capability.
Pricing
| Plan | Cursor | Antigravity |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Limited (Hobby) | Yes — public preview |
| Pro | $20/month | Free (preview, rate-limited) |
| Business | $40/user/month | Paid tier not yet GA |
Antigravity is currently free during its public preview — that is the headline number. But free-tier rate limits have tightened since March 2026: the refresh window moved from 5-hour cycles to weekly caps, and developers doing intensive work report hitting limits within 2-3 hours of a session.
For serious daily development, the free tier does not sustain professional workloads. When Antigravity formalises its pricing later in 2026, the cost comparison will look different. Cursor at $20/month is a known quantity.
The Autonomy Gap
Antigravity in Fast Mode executes without human checkpoints. Agents issue commands, write files, and modify configurations without pausing. The Artifacts system gives you a post-hoc record of what happened. This is powerful for parallel orchestration; it is also where documented incidents have occurred — agents issuing destructive commands on unsupervised runs.
Cursor 3's agents run with higher interactivity. The default is to keep you in the loop rather than execute autonomously. Cloud handoff is the exception — tasks running in the cloud after you close your laptop do execute without supervision — but the scope is limited to the specific task you handed off.
What Each Tool Is Better At
Use Cursor 3 when:
- You want to stay in active coding flow with agent assistance rather than switch to orchestration mode
- Cloud handoff matters — starting a task at the office and having it keep running overnight
- You need a predictable monthly cost without surprise rate-limit hits
- Your team is already on Cursor and switching has a real migration cost
- You prefer sequential, reviewable agent steps over parallel autonomous execution
Use Antigravity when:
- Parallel multi-agent orchestration is the actual bottleneck — you have enough tasks to benefit from running several simultaneously
- Browser-based UI verification is part of your workflow (building and visually checking interfaces without switching context)
- You are in a prototyping or exploration phase where speed beats control
- The free tier covers your current workload
- You want to evaluate Google's model stack (Gemini 3.1 Pro) without managing API keys
The Honest Summary
Cursor 3 and Antigravity address different workflow stages. Cursor is better when you are coding — moving fast, iterating, staying engaged with the work. Antigravity is better when you have a pile of defined tasks and want to run them in parallel while you do something else.
The developers getting the most out of 2026's agentic tooling are often using Cursor for active sessions and Antigravity for batch execution. They are not as mutually exclusive as the comparison framing implies.
Benchmark data as of April–May 2026. Antigravity pricing subject to change as preview period ends.
Sources:
- Cursor vs Antigravity: Best AI IDE for Vibe Coders - Medium
- Agentic IDE Comparison: Cursor vs Windsurf vs Antigravity - Codecademy
- Cursor 3 vs Google Antigravity: Best AI IDE 2026 - Build Fast With AI
- Cursor vs Antigravity: Which Fits Your Enterprise Team? - Augment Code
- Google Antigravity Review: Free AI IDE vs Cursor vs Claude Code - Y Build
- Antigravity vs Cursor 2026 - Antigravity Lab