Windsurf vs Cursor: A Real-World Test
We used both Windsurf and Cursor on the same project for two weeks. The differences are smaller than the discourse suggests.
The AI editor wars generated more opinion than data in 2025. We decided to run an actual comparison on a real project.
Setup
Two developers, same project, same tasks. One used Windsurf, the other used Cursor. After one week, they swapped. We tracked completion time, edit acceptance rate, and subjective satisfaction.
Speed
Both tools produced initial code at roughly the same speed. The difference showed up in iteration — Cursor's tab completion felt faster for small edits, while Windsurf's Cascade feature was better for multi-file changes.
Accuracy
On our codebase, Cursor had a higher first-attempt acceptance rate for single-file edits. Windsurf had better results when the task involved understanding relationships between files.
The context window
This is where the real difference lives. Windsurf's approach to context management felt more intelligent — it pulled in relevant files without being asked. Cursor required more explicit context management but gave you more control.
Developer experience
Both are VS Code forks with similar UX patterns. The learning curve switching between them was minimal. Plugin compatibility was slightly better in Cursor due to its larger user base.
Our take
Pick the one that matches your workflow preference. If you want more control, Cursor. If you want the AI to take more initiative, Windsurf. Both are good enough that the choice won't limit you.