Originally published at heycc.cn. This is a mirrored copy — the canonical version is kept up to date at the source.
Cursor vs Windsurf in 2026: Pricing, Features, and Why Windsurf Is Now Devin Desktop
Both Cursor and Windsurf started life as VS Code forks chasing the same dream: an editor that thinks in code with you instead of just rendering it. For most of 2024 and 2025 they were the two names you'd weigh against each other, often with the same $20 headline price. In 2026 they've diverged sharply — different billing philosophies, different in-house models, different bets on what an "AI IDE" even is. And one of them isn't called Windsurf anymore.
The acquisition-and-rebrand saga is the most-written-about story in AI tooling this year, so the recap below stays tight. The part worth your time is further down: how the two products bill you, the decision rules that follow from that, and a small-team cost example that most "Windsurf is now Devin Desktop" explainers skip entirely.
Do this first: figure out what "Windsurf" means today
Here's a year of corporate drama in one paragraph. In mid-2025, Google struck a deal to hire away Windsurf's CEO Varun Mohan and co-founder Douglas Chen. Days later, on July 14, 2025, Cognition (the company behind the Devin coding agent) signed a definitive agreement to acquire what remained of Windsurf — its IP, product, trademark, brand, and team, including roughly $82M in ARR and 350+ enterprise customers. Two months later, Cognition was valued at $10.2 billion. Then, on June 2, 2026, Windsurf was rebranded as Devin Desktop via an over-the-air update.
The Devin pricing page now greets you with the banner "Windsurf is now Devin Desktop. The IDE you love, with more features." The launch blog opens the same way: "We're excited to launch the next generation of Windsurf: Devin Desktop."
So the phrase "Windsurf, now Devin Desktop" that recurs below isn't redundancy — it's the literal product name change. Any older comparison that talks about "Windsurf pricing" without mentioning Devin predates the rebrand, and its numbers may be wrong. Practically, two things follow. First, your billing, docs, and downloads now live at devin.ai, not windsurf.com. Second, the product's center of gravity is shifting from "AI editor" toward "agent command center" — Devin Desktop now opens on an Agent Command Center screen rather than dropping you straight into the editor.
That's the recap. The rest of this piece is where the two products actually differ.
Pricing tiers, head to head
Both products lead with a free tier and a $20 "pro" tier, which makes them look identical at a glance. They aren't. The deeper difference is the billing philosophy: Cursor sells you a burstable credit pool, while Devin Desktop sells you a capped quota.
The table below is a snapshot as of 2026-06-28. The dollar amounts are the stable part; the usage multipliers and "quota" language are vendor shorthand for request-equivalent credit metering that genuinely shifts month to month, so treat the per-cell mechanics as directional and confirm at the source before buying.
| Tier (as of 2026-06-28) | Cursor | Windsurf, now Devin Desktop |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Hobby — $0, no card. Limited Agent requests + unlimited Tab completions | Free — $0. Light quota, unlimited inline edits + Tab completions |
| Entry paid | Pro — $20/mo, monthly credit pool | Pro — $20/mo, increased quota, free SWE-1.6 |
| Mid paid | Pro+ — $60/mo, larger credit pool | (no direct equivalent) |
| Power | Ultra — $200/mo, largest credit pool | Max — $200/mo, significantly higher quotas |
| Teams | $40/seat/mo, SAML/OIDC SSO | $80/mo base + $40/seat per full developer |
| Enterprise | Custom — pooled usage, SCIM, access controls | Custom — SSO, dedicated deployment |
The headline numbers ($0, $20, $200) line up almost suspiciously well. The mechanics under them do not.
Cursor's credit-pool model. On a paid Cursor plan, Auto mode and Cursor's Fusion-model Tab completions are effectively unlimited. Your monthly fee buys a credit pool that depletes when you pick a frontier model — Claude, GPT, Gemini, Grok — for agent work. Run a heavy day and you can burn through the pool, then either throttle back to Auto/Tab or pay on-demand overage. It rewards people who let the cheaper in-house models do the bulk of the work and reach for frontier models surgically.
Devin Desktop's quota model. Devin Desktop gives you a quota that refreshes on a daily/weekly cadence. Inline edits and Tab completions are unlimited even on Free; the metered part is agent and frontier-model usage against your quota, with overage billed at API pricing. SWE-1.6 (their in-house model) is included free on paid plans and doesn't eat your frontier budget — the pricing page lists "Free access to SWE 1.6 and open source models" under the Pro tier.
The decision rule: bursty, frontier-heavy workflows favor Cursor's burstable credits; steady daily-driver use favors Devin's predictable quota.
The team math most explainers miss
Here's the original wrinkle. Per devin.ai/pricing, Devin's Teams tier carries an $80/mo base fee on top of $40/seat, while Cursor Teams is a flat $40/seat with no base fee. That base fee inverts the "they're both about the same" intuition at small scale:
| Team size | Cursor Teams ($40/seat) | Devin Teams ($80 base + $40/seat) | Cheaper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 developers | $80/mo | $160/mo | Cursor |
| 4 developers | $160/mo | $240/mo | Cursor |
| 8 developers | $320/mo | $400/mo | Cursor |
| 20 developers | $800/mo | $880/mo | Cursor |
The base fee is a fixed $80 regardless of size, so it amortizes away as you grow — at 2 seats it doubles your bill, at 20 it's a 10% premium. The takeaway isn't "Cursor is always cheaper for teams"; it's that Devin's $80 base fee makes it disproportionately expensive for 2–4 person shops, and that gap is the single most decision-relevant number the headline-price comparison hides. (The whole small-team conclusion hinges on that base fee, so confirm it on the pricing page before you commit — if Cognition drops it, the conclusion flips.)
Model access
This is where the two products express genuinely different engineering philosophies.
Cursor ships an in-house line plus the full frontier menu. Its first-party agent model is the Composer line — currently Composer 2.5 as of this review date (the lineage runs Composer 1 in Oct 2025 → 1.5 → 2 → 2.5 by May 2026), a fast multi-file edit model tuned for the agentic loop. Its Tab/autocomplete model is Fusion (announced January 2025), a low-latency model purpose-built for inline completions. On top of those you get Anthropic Claude, OpenAI GPT, Google Gemini, and xAI Grok. The pitch: use Cursor's own fast models for constant background work, escalate to a frontier model when the task is hard.
Devin Desktop leans on SWE-1.6. Released April 7, 2026, SWE-1.6 is Cognition's current free proprietary coding model, succeeding SWE-1.5. The nuance the marketing blurs: the ~11% gain on SWE-Bench Pro (≈50.4% vs 40.1%) belongs to the SWE-1.6 Preview. The released SWE-1.6 matches the Preview's quality on SWE-Bench Pro while using ~40% fewer assistant turns — so the headline of the final release is efficiency ("intelligence per token," less overthinking and looping), not a further accuracy jump. It's included free on paid Devin Desktop plans, and you can still reach for OpenAI, Claude, and Gemini.
If you want the broadest frontier menu (Grok included) and a clear fast-edit/fast-tab split, Cursor edges it. If you want one strong free house model that's getting faster and don't care about Grok, SWE-1.6 is compelling. For a wider field — including terminal-first agents like Claude Code — see our best AI coding assistants comparison and the Claude Code vs. Cursor breakdown.
Agentic features and the Cascade deadline
Cursor's agent story in 2026 is built around the Composer/Agent loop plus Cloud Agents, which launched with Cursor 3.5 on May 20, 2026. These run in isolated cloud VMs with full terminal, browser, and desktop access and can work across multiple repos in parallel — handy for long-running refactors you kick off and check back on. Background Agents and Bugbot (agentic code review) round out the lineup.
On the Windsurf, now Devin Desktop side, there's a migration cliff you must plan around. Cascade — Windsurf's original agent — was announced with a July 1, 2026 end-of-life date; Cognition's current Devin Desktop FAQ (re-checked in this pass) instead states "the existing Cascade agent remains available through July," which is looser than the original hard-cutoff framing — verify the live FAQ yourself before assuming an exact date, since this is exactly the kind of migration-deadline detail vendors quietly adjust. Either way, Cascade is being replaced by Devin Local, a full Rust rewrite of Cascade that Cognition says delivers up to 30% greater token efficiency and adds parallel subagents that Cascade lacked. Retrieval changes too: instead of Cursor's approach of chunking files into vector embeddings for semantic search, Devin Desktop uses "Fast Context" via SWE-grep, retrieving relevant code in milliseconds through parallel tool calls.
If you're adopting Devin Desktop now, treat Cascade as already on borrowed time and Devin Local as the agent you'll actually live with — any CI pipeline or automation script that still explicitly invokes Cascade needs to be repointed regardless of the exact sunset date.
Editor lock-in: the quiet tiebreaker
Both are VS Code forks — Cursor by Anysphere re-renders the editor around AI, and Devin Desktop is "the same VS Code fork with the same extensions and settings," just opening on an Agent Command Center. So switching costs are low on both: your extensions, keybindings, and settings come with you either way.
The asymmetry is strategic, not technical. Cursor is doubling down on the editor as the primary surface and treating cloud agents as an extension of it. Devin Desktop is doing the reverse — treating the desktop IDE as one of several surfaces for a single agent ("Devin Desktop is not just for Devin," in Cognition's framing), with the same Devin available in the cloud, CLI, and editor. If your bet is "the IDE stays central," Cursor's roadmap aligns with you. If your bet is "the agent is the product and the editor is just one window into it," Devin's does.
So which one should you use
- Solo developer, bursty frontier-model use: Cursor's credit pool lets you spike hard on big days and coast on the free in-house models the rest of the time.
- Solo developer, steady daily driver: Devin Desktop's predictable quota plus free SWE-1.6 is the calmer bill.
- 2–4 person team on a budget: Cursor wins on raw cost — Devin's $80 base fee stings at small headcount.
- Larger team or agent-first org: the base fee amortizes away; pick on agent strategy and surface (editor-centric Cursor vs. agent-everywhere Devin), not price.
- Already on Windsurf: plan your Cascade exit now — Devin Local is the agent you'll actually be using, and any script/CI job still calling Cascade directly needs repointing regardless of the exact sunset date.
Where the figures come from
The pricing tiers, the $80 Teams base fee, and the free-SWE-1.6 detail are taken from cursor.com/pricing and devin.ai/pricing, read on 2026-06-28. Cursor's Composer 2.5 and Fusion lineage trace to Cursor's models-and-pricing docs and the Tab "Fusion" announcement. The rebrand narrative — the July 14, 2025 acquisition, the $82M ARR / 350+ customers, the $10.2B valuation, and the June 2, 2026 Devin Desktop launch — comes from Cognition's acquisition post and its "Windsurf is now Devin Desktop" blog; the SWE-1.6 numbers (the Preview's ~50.4% vs 40.1% on SWE-Bench Pro and the released model's ~40%-fewer-turns efficiency) are from Cognition's SWE-1.6 release notes. As of this writing windsurf.com/pricing issues a 308 redirect to devin.ai/pricing. Tiers and quotas in this category genuinely move month to month, so re-check both live pricing pages before buying. A 2026-07-03 re-check of docs.devin.ai/desktop/devin-desktop-faq found Cascade's EOL framing had shifted from the original "July 1, 2026" hard date to "remains available through July" — the Cascade-deadline section above was updated to reflect that rather than repeat the earlier, now-superseded specific date.
Top comments (0)