AI coding tools have changed how developers write software. Three platforms now lead this space: Google Antigravity, Cursor, and Claude Code. Each takes a different approach to helping you code faster and smarter. This guide breaks down their features, pricing, and ideal use cases so you can pick the right tool for your workflow.

Quick Comparison: Which AI Coding Tool Should You Choose?

What Is Google Antigravity?

Google Antigravity launched in November 2025 alongside Gemini 3. It represents Google's most ambitious AI coding platform to date. The tool came from Google's acquisition of the Windsurf team for $2.4 billion in July 2025.

Antigravity takes an "agent-first" approach. This means AI agents don't just suggest code—they autonomously plan, execute, and verify tasks across your editor, terminal, and browser. You describe what you want built, and agents handle the implementation.

Key Features of Google Antigravity

Two Working Modes:

• Editor View: Traditional IDE experience with AI in a side panel. Works like Cursor or GitHub Copilot for hands-on coding
• Manager View: Mission control for multiple agents. Spawn and monitor several agents working on different tasks at once

Browser Control: Agents can launch browsers, interact with your app's UI, and take screenshots or recordings to verify their work. This eliminates the need for separate tools like Playwright.

Artifacts System: Instead of just outputting code, agents produce task lists, implementation plans, screenshots, and video walkthroughs. You review these to verify work before accepting changes.

Model Options: Gemini 3 Pro (default), Claude Sonnet 4.5, and GPT-OSS 120B. Switch between models based on your needs.

Google Antigravity Pricing

Currently free during public preview. Google provides "generous rate limits" on Gemini 3 Pro usage. Paid plans are expected once the preview period ends. Some users report hitting rate limits quickly, especially on launch day.

Best Use Cases for Google Antigravity

• Building full-stack applications from scratch
• UI iteration with visual verification
• Parallel development across multiple workspaces
• Projects where you want minimal hands-on coding
• Developers comfortable with autonomous AI agents

Google Antigravity Limitations

• New platform (November 2025) with stability issues reported
• Rate limiting can interrupt workflows
• Complex tasks may require multiple iterations
• Enterprise security certifications not yet available
• Learning curve for Manager View features

What Is Cursor?

Cursor is an AI-powered IDE built on VS Code. It launched in 2023 and has become the dominant player in AI-assisted coding. As of November 2025, Cursor crossed $1 billion in annualized revenue and reached a $29.3 billion valuation.

Cursor embeds AI throughout your coding experience rather than creating a separate agent workflow. You stay in control while AI accelerates execution. The familiar VS Code interface means almost no learning curve for existing VS Code users.

Key Features of Cursor

Multiple Interaction Modes:

• Tab Completion: Smart autocomplete that understands your entire project, not just the current file
• Cmd+K Inline Edits: Select code and describe changes in natural language
• Composer Mode: Point at specific files and request cross-file changes with diff preview
• Agent Mode: Let AI roam freely across your project to implement features

Composer Model: Cursor 2.0 introduced their own coding model designed for speed. It operates at roughly 2x the speed of Claude Sonnet 4.5 while maintaining similar quality.

Project-Wide Context: Cursor indexes your entire codebase—folders, dependencies, README files, and comments. When you ask questions, it references your actual project rather than generic patterns.

Rules System: Pin instructions to projects, users, or teams. Set coding conventions, framework guidance, and style preferences that persist across sessions.

Cursor Pricing

Note: In June 2025, Cursor moved from request-based to usage-based billing. Your monthly credit pool depletes based on model costs and context length.

Best Use Cases for Cursor

• Developers who want AI in a familiar IDE environment
• Cross-file refactoring projects
• Rapid prototyping and iteration
• Teams that need collaborative features
• Projects requiring fine-grained control over AI suggestions

Cursor Limitations

• Interface can feel cluttered with AI buttons and panels
• Pricing changes in 2025 frustrated some users
• Agent mode may make unexpected changes in large projects
• Complex business logic often needs manual adjustments
• Performance can lag on very large codebases

What Is Claude Code?

Claude Code is Anthropic's terminal-based coding assistant. It launched in February 2025 and quickly became popular for its deep codebase understanding and agentic capabilities. Claude Code reportedly generated over $500 million in run-rate revenue by mid-2025.

Unlike Cursor's IDE approach, Claude Code runs in your terminal. You describe what you want, and it plans multi-step tasks, executes them, and fixes problems autonomously. Recent updates added VS Code extension support and web-based access.

Key Features of Claude Code

Terminal-First Design: Works directly in your command line alongside your existing tools. No need to switch IDEs or learn new interfaces.

Checkpoints: Automatically saves your code state before each change. Rewind instantly if something goes wrong using Esc twice or the /rewind command.

Subagents: Delegate specialized tasks to separate agents. One can build the backend while another works on the frontend in parallel.

VS Code Extension: Beta extension brings Claude Code into VS Code with inline diffs and a dedicated sidebar panel.

Claude Code on the Web: Run coding tasks from your browser on Anthropic's cloud infrastructure. Connect GitHub repositories and delegate tasks without opening your terminal.

MCP Integration: Connect to external servers for additional capabilities like browser automation, API access, and more.

Claude Code Pricing

Claude Code uses Anthropic's subscription model:

API Pricing (per million tokens):

Pro subscription offers approximately $150 worth of API usage for $20/month.

Best Use Cases for Claude Code

• Experienced developers comfortable with terminal workflows
• Deep codebase exploration and understanding
• Multi-step automated tasks (bug fixes, testing, documentation)
• Developers who prefer reviewing diffs over watching AI type
• Projects requiring strong reasoning and code quality

Claude Code Limitations

• Terminal interface has steeper learning curve than IDE tools
• No visual file management or GUI
• Rate limits can interrupt heavy usage
• Context resets between sessions (manual memory setup required)
• First attempts often need iteration

Head-to-Head Comparison

Autonomy Level

Antigravity aims to let you operate at a "task-oriented level" where you focus on product vision while agents handle implementation. Cursor keeps you more hands-on but accelerates your work. Claude Code sits in between—you delegate tasks but review changes before committing.

Code Quality

Developer reports suggest Claude Code produces fewer overall code reworks—approximately 30% less compared to Cursor. Claude models tend to get things right in the first or second iteration more often.

Cursor's project-wide context helps generated code match your existing style and patterns. The Composer model prioritizes speed while maintaining competitive quality.

Antigravity is too new for extensive quality comparisons, but early benchmarks show strong performance: 76.2% on SWE-bench Verified and 54.2% on Terminal-Bench 2.0.

Learning Curve

Cursor wins for developers already using VS Code. Extensions, themes, and shortcuts carry over. Antigravity also uses VS Code as a base but introduces new concepts like Manager View and Artifacts.

Claude Code requires comfort with terminal workflows. Many developers report becoming productive within hours, but the initial setup and mental model differ from IDE tools.

Speed and Efficiency

Cursor's Composer model claims 4x speed improvements for code generation. Users report it feels "instant enough" that they no longer hesitate to rerun prompts.

Claude Code focuses on getting things right rather than being fastest. Users describe spending more time reviewing than coding—which many see as a feature, not a bug.

Antigravity's agent-first approach means you can spawn multiple agents and work on other things while they complete tasks. This parallel execution can compress project timelines significantly.

Enterprise Readiness

For regulated industries (healthcare, finance, legal), Cursor and Claude Code currently offer more mature enterprise features. Antigravity needs time to build compliance documentation.

Real User Experiences

Google Antigravity User Feedback

Early adopters report mixed experiences:

Positive:

• "Built Twitter clone and finance tracker in minutes for free"
• "Browser integration is a game changer"
• "Migrated 100K line repo in one shot"

Negative:

• "Struggles with complex tasks, requires multiple iterations"
• "Hit rate limits quickly"
• "UI can feel overwhelming compared to Claude Code's clean CLI"

The consensus: high potential but stability improvements needed. Best for experimental projects rather than production work in 2025.

Cursor User Feedback

Long-term users describe Cursor as "the most complete AI-first editor" available:

Positive:

• "Feels like an evolution of my existing environment"
• "Project-wide context means code blends naturally with my style"
• "Rapid prototyping went from days to hours"

Negative:

• "Interface can feel busy with all the AI buttons"
• "June 2025 pricing changes were poorly communicated"
• "Agent mode can make weird changes if prompts aren't clear"

Power users recommend investing time in Rules and Plan Mode to get predictable results.

Claude Code User Feedback

Developers praise Claude Code's reasoning quality:

Positive:

• "Projects that took three weeks done in two days"
• "More like a code editor than a typical AI tool"
• "Cut pull-request feedback loops by 40x"

Negative:

• "First attempt will be 95% garbage—iteration is the process"
• "Terminal interface feels rough compared to full IDE"
• "Context resets between sessions require manual memory setup"

The common advice: treat Claude Code like a junior developer who needs clear context but can execute quickly once they understand the task.

Which Tool Should You Choose?

Choose Google Antigravity If:

• You want to experiment with cutting-edge agent technology
• Autonomous task completion appeals to you
• You need browser-based testing integrated into your workflow
• Free access during preview matters for your budget
• You're comfortable being an early adopter with occasional stability issues

Choose Cursor If:

• You already use VS Code and want minimal disruption
• Fine-grained control over AI suggestions matters
• Your team needs collaborative features and admin controls
• Rapid iteration cycles define your workflow
• You prefer an IDE interface over terminal tools

Choose Claude Code If:

• Terminal workflows fit your development style
• Code quality and reasoning matter more than speed
• You work on complex codebases requiring deep understanding
• Reviewing diffs appeals more than watching AI type
• You're an experienced developer comfortable with CLI tools

Practical Recommendations by Use Case

The Future of AI Coding Tools

All three platforms continue rapid development:

Google Antigravity will likely add enterprise features, improve stability, and potentially introduce paid tiers as the preview ends.

Cursor recently shipped Composer (their own model), background agents, and continues weekly releases. They're pursuing deeper CI/CD integration.

Claude Code added checkpoints, VS Code extension, and web access in late 2025. Expect more IDE integrations and improved memory between sessions.

The real winner may be developers themselves. You now have multiple powerful options to choose from based on specific needs rather than being locked into a single approach.

Try each tool on a small project. Give AI three attempts at implementing a feature. Review the output honestly. That simple experiment will reveal which tool matches your workflow better than any comparison guide.

The future of coding isn't about AI replacing developers. It's about developers working faster, creating better solutions, and choosing the best tools for each task at hand.