Cursor vs Zed: what 21 developers chose.
1,223 opinions. 21 developers named a direct preference: Zed 14–7. Approval is 55% vs 59%.
Zed wins the direct preference 14–7, but both tools score best on the same topic. Use the decision cards below to choose on workflow.
Choose Cursor if you…
- Rely on Cursor Tab for completions and refactors
- Want one interface for Claude, Codex and other agents
- Accept higher cost and some reliability risk for that workflow
Choose Zed if you…
- Want a fast native editor with a strong agent panel
- Care about battery, memory and startup speed
- Prefer ACP so existing Claude Code and Codex CLI subscriptions work
Cursor and Zed: where each one wins.
Net sentiment per topic: praise minus complaints, as a share of mentions. Positive means more praise than complaints. Hover a dot for the raw counts.
Net sentiment = praise minus complaints, as a share of each tool's mentions. The dot lanes are only for readability; position is the score.
View data table
| Topic | Cursor | Zed | Mentions |
|---|---|---|---|
| UX | +26 | +36 | 160 / 175 |
| Speed | +69 | +59 | 52 / 78 |
| Cost & pricing | -2 | +25 | 118 / 8 |
| Reliability | -61 | -33 | 72 / 48 |
| Code quality | +9 | 0 | 108 / 6 |
| Autonomy | +15 | +43 | 52 / 7 |
| Customization | +40 | +4 | 30 / 27 |
The same decision, from both sides.
Paraphrased from comments where a developer named a preference or described a switch. Each links to the original.
Picked Cursor 7 developers
Composer 2 is inexpensive and dependable, and Cursor combines a strong coding agent with a usable UI.
Wanted to like Zed but found its tab completion unusable next to Cursor's.
Tried Zed but got worse AI results than Cursor, and Cursor Agent over ACP felt weaker than Cursor itself.
Loved Zed for a few days but returned to Cursor because Cursor Tab predicted edits across files.
Picked Zed 14 developers
Stopped using Cursor because it felt clunky and prefers the snappy Rust-based Codex CLI and Zed.
Rates Cursor's tab and agent UI highly but left because it lacks ACP support for Claude Code.
Gets better results and far lower token use from Zed with Copilot than from Cursor.
Zed is better for MacBook battery and uses ACP to drive installed Claude Code and Codex CLIs.
The numbers.
| Metric | Cursor | Zed |
|---|---|---|
| Approval | 55% | 59% |
| Last 90 days | 53% | 57% |
| Opinions | 766 | 457 |
| Developers | 600 | 378 |
| First-hand opinions | 583 | 376 |
| Direct picks | 7 | 14 |
| Type | AI IDE | Editor |
| Made by | Anysphere | Zed Industries |
| Website | Visit ↗ | Visit ↗ |
Related matchups.
Claude Code vs Cursor
61–42 direct picks, and a clear difference in what developers optimise for.
OpenAI Codex vs Cursor
21–7 direct picks, and a clear difference in what developers optimise for.
Cursor vs GitHub Copilot
10–3 direct picks, and a clear difference in what developers optimise for.
How to read this comparison.
Approval is the positive share of opinions that took a side, with the rank based on the lower bound of a 90% confidence interval. Direct picks count comments where a developer explicitly preferred one tool or described switching. Small samples are noisier; check the opinion counts.
Get the monthly report
Which AI coding tools gained or lost developer approval on Hacker News, and why people switched. One email a month.