Bolt.new vs Cursor
A detailed comparison to help you choose between Bolt.new and Cursor.
🏆
Verdict: Cursor wins
Cursor scores 4.2/5, edging out Bolt.new at 4.0/5. Professional developers who want the strongest codebase-aware agent editor and can use (or tolerate paying for) the Grok/X bundle around it.
Bolt.new Prompt, run, edit, and deploy full-stack apps | Cursor The AI-first code editor | |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.0 (1 review) | 4.2 (1 review) |
| Pricing Model | freemium | freemium |
| Starting Price | Free tier available | Free tier available |
| Best For | Founders and builders who want to prompt a full-stack web app into existence, iterate on it in the browser, and deploy without assembling a development setup. | Professional developers who want the strongest codebase-aware agent editor and can use (or tolerate paying for) the Grok/X bundle around it. |
| Free Tier | ||
| API Access | ||
| Team Features | ||
| Open Source | ||
| Tags | free tierno code | free tierbyok |
| Visit Bolt.new → | Visit Cursor → |
Bolt.new
Pros
- + Generated a working full-stack booking app with a correct relational data model in about two minutes, running live in the preview
- + Free tier is a real sandbox: 1M tokens/month plus hosting with unlimited databases and 333K web requests
- + Error self-repair loop fixed dev-server failures without being prompted
- + One-click Netlify deployment and clean GitHub export when a project outgrows the browser
Cons
- - Token cost grows with project size — Bolt's own docs say filesystem syncing drives most consumption
- - A failed fix loop burned a visible chunk of my monthly allocation with zero progress
- - Context degrades on large builds; fixes land in the wrong layer without careful prompting
- - Real cost is subscription plus token reloads, and the reload number is not quoted anywhere upfront
Cursor
Pros
- + Codebase context is the deepest I have tested — multi-file refactors arrive as coherent changes across routes, tests and types
- + The X Subscription bundles Grok, Cursor and X Premium: Premium at $30/mo replaces what xAI says was $90/mo of separate plans (x.ai/news/x-subscription)
- + Agent surface is broad: Cloud Agents, Automations, Bugbot PR review, CLI, Cursor SDK and an iOS app behind one router
- + Legacy subscribers keep their old plans and prices — the migration is optional, with prorated refunds on switching (cursor.com/help)
- + Familiar VS Code base means your extensions, keybindings and workflows come along
Cons
- - Acquired and re-platformed: new plans bill through grok.com with a Grok-weighted model lineup, and switching from a legacy plan is permanent
- - Plus at $8/mo is a teaser — no Auto, Cloud Agents, Automations or Bugbot; professional work needs Premium at $30/mo or above
- - Proprietary code goes to Cursor's servers during indexing and agent runs unless you configure privacy controls
- - Third-party models bill at API list price from prepaid credit, so costs outside the included pool are hard to predict
- - Two coexisting billing systems and two plan ladders make the real cost of a given workload hard to compare
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is better, Bolt.new or Cursor?▼
Cursor scores higher at 4.2/5 vs 4.0/5 for Bolt.new, making it the better-rated option in our comparison.
What is the difference between Bolt.new and Cursor?▼
Bolt.new: Bolt builds and deploys full-stack web apps from a prompt in the browser, with the generated code editable in place. Cursor: Cursor is an AI code editor built on VS Code, with agents that can read a whole codebase, answer questions about it and make changes across multiple files.
Is Bolt.new or Cursor more affordable?▼
Bolt.new starts at €0/mo, Cursor starts at €0/mo. Check the comparison table above for current pricing.
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new AI tools, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.