Antigravity vs Cursor 2026: 5 gaps that decide the enterprise rollout

Summary. Google Antigravity is generally available at $0 a month for individuals, with agent access to Gemini 3.5 Flash, Gemini 3.1 Pro, Gemini 3 Flash, Claude Sonnet and Opus 4.6 and gpt-oss-120b, plus unlimited Tab completions. Paid quota rides on Google AI plans: $20 a month for Google AI Pro, a new $100 a month AI Ultra tier at 5X the Pro rate limit, and a top AI Ultra tier cut from $250 to $200 a month on 19 May 2026 at 20X the Pro limit. Antigravity's own documentation states there is currently no support for organisational tiers via contract and no bring-your-own-key. The enterprise path instead runs through Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform on consumption-based billing under Google Cloud terms, and it covers Antigravity 2.0 and the CLI only: the Antigravity IDE is not supported for enterprise customers. Cursor, built by Anysphere, sells seats: Hobby free, Pro $20, Pro+ $60, Ultra $200, Teams Standard $40 a seat monthly or $32 annually, and a Teams Premium seat introduced on 1 June 2026 at $120 monthly or $96 annually carrying 5x the Standard usage for 3x the cost. Those changes hit renewing customers on billing cycles from 1 July 2026. Both products support MCP, despite a persistent claim to the contrary in secondary coverage. For a team of 20 to 200 developers, the decision is not which agent writes better code. It is whether you want a predictable per-seat line item or a metered Google Cloud bill, and whether you can live with what each vendor does not sell.

Gap 1: one vendor sells seats, the other sells consumption

Cursor's published plan table is unusually legible for this category.

Plan	Price	Included third-party model usage
Hobby	Free	Limited
Pro	$20/month	$20
Pro+	$60/month	$70
Ultra	$200/month	$400
Teams Standard	$40/user/month	Standard team allowance
Teams Premium	$120/user/month	5x Standard team allowance

Enterprise adds pooled usage, SCIM provisioning, audit logs, advanced admin controls and invoice billing, priced on contact.

Antigravity's pricing page lists no equivalent. Individuals get a generally available $0 plan. Beyond that, rate limits and model availability track the Google AI subscription the developer holds, and the Antigravity plans documentation says plainly that there is "currently no support for" both bring-your-own-key or bring-your-own-endpoint for additional rate limits and organisational tiers via contract.

For an engineering leader, that sentence is the whole procurement story. You cannot buy 60 Antigravity seats. You either let 60 developers each hold a personal Google AI subscription, which is a reimbursement problem rather than a contract, or you move the whole team onto Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform and pay for tokens.

Question	Cursor	Antigravity
Contracted team tier	Teams and Enterprise plans	Not available; enterprise runs via Google Cloud
Unit of billing	Seat, plus usage pools	Consumption (tokens) under Google Cloud terms
Free individual tier	Hobby, limited usage	$0, generally available, weekly rate limits
Admin controls named on public pages	SCIM, audit logs, pooled usage, spend alerts	Google Cloud IAM, VPC Service Controls, request logging
Bring your own key	Not offered on published plans	Explicitly not supported
Forecastability	High, seat count is the driver	Low until you have a month of token data

The trade is real in both directions. A seat model over-charges the developer who barely uses the agent and under-charges the one who runs it all day. A consumption model prices each of them correctly and gives you no number to put in next year's budget.

Gap 2: the enterprise path drops the IDE

This is the detail most comparisons miss, and it is a rollout blocker rather than a preference.

Antigravity's enterprise documentation states that integration with Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform "is only supported for Antigravity 2.0 and Antigravity CLI. Antigravity IDE is not supported for enterprise customers."

So if your reason for evaluating Antigravity is that your developers want an agent-first IDE running against models in your own Google Cloud project, under Google Cloud terms, with data residency and private networking, that specific combination is not on the table today. Enterprise-connected developers work in the Antigravity 2.0 desktop application or the CLI.

Setting up that path is Google Cloud administration, not a procurement form:

Select or create a Google Cloud project, which needs the Project Creator role (roles/resourcemanager.projectCreator) if you are creating one.

Verify billing is enabled on the project.

Enable the Agent Platform API (aiplatform.googleapis.com), which needs the Service Usage Admin role (roles/serviceusage.serviceUsageAdmin).

Grant each developer the Agent Platform User role (roles/aiplatform.user) on the project, or an equivalent custom role.

Add the Agent Platform API to your VPC Service Controls perimeter if your organisation runs one.

Two operational constraints sit on top. Antigravity CLI and 2.0 currently offer three endpoints, global, multi-region EU and multi-region US, and image generation is not available in the EU and US locations. And switching Google Cloud project or location requires logging out of the CLI or Hub and logging back in; changing it in place is not supported.

Cursor's equivalent is a plan upgrade. That asymmetry is worth naming honestly: Cursor sells you a product, Google gives you a platform and expects you to administer it.

Gap 3: both support MCP, and the record needs correcting

A claim that circulated widely through comparison blogs in the first half of 2026 is that Antigravity does not support MCP servers, which would rule it out for any team whose agent workflow depends on internal tool integrations.

Antigravity's own documentation contradicts it. There are dedicated MCP pages for Antigravity 2.0, for the Antigravity CLI, for the Antigravity SDK and for the Antigravity IDE, alongside Skills, Rules, Plugins, Hooks and Sidecars under the same Customizations grouping. Whatever was true earlier in the product's life, MCP support is documented across all four surfaces as of August 2026.

Verify this one yourself before it decides a bid. It is a good example of a category where secondary sources age badly inside a quarter, and where a vendor's own docs tree settles the question in about a minute. Our comparison of AI coding agent harnesses covers the equivalent question for CLI-first tools.

Gap 4: how each vendor stops a power user from eating the budget

Both vendors have shipped cost controls in 2026, and they solve the problem in opposite ways.

Cursor's answer is seat segmentation. Its 1 June 2026 Teams pricing post describes the pattern directly: "a small number of power users on any team tend to drive the majority of spend and unpredictable on-demand costs." The Premium seat exists for those users at 5x the included usage of Standard for 3x the cost, teams can mix seat types freely, and Cursor says it expects the Premium seat's first-party model pool "to cover a full month of heavy agent usage for 99% of users." Every Teams seat now carries two separate included pools, one reserved for Cursor's own Composer models and Auto, and one for third-party API usage. Admins get a dashboard showing how close each user is to each limit, seat-type recommendations, and rebuilt spend alerting on dollar thresholds delivered through Slack or email.

Antigravity's answer is quota and a switch. All plans get a baseline quota; Google AI Ultra users get the highest quota refreshed every five hours plus access to third-party models, Google AI Pro users get a high quota refreshed every five hours until the weekly limit is reached, and everyone else gets a weekly refresh. Above the baseline, Pro and Ultra users spend purchased AI credits, consumed at standard Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform consumption pricing. The behaviour is controlled by an "AI Credit Overages" setting with two values: Never, which waits for the quota to refresh, and Always, which spends credits automatically.

Google also changed how the underlying quota is drawn. Gemini Flash and Gemini Pro used to carry separate rate limits; they now share one pool drawn down at API pricing, so, in Google's own worked example, if Flash is 8x cheaper than Pro you can spend X tokens on Pro, 8X on Flash, or any linear combination between. Non-Gemini models stay on a separate fixed rate limit, which Google attributes to "severe capacity limitations." If model choice rather than tooling is your real question, our frontier model comparison covers the underlying rates.

Control	Cursor	Antigravity
Primary lever	Seat tier (Standard vs Premium)	Subscription tier and quota refresh cadence
Overage behaviour	On-demand usage above pooled allowance	AI credits, set to Never or Always
Model cost routing	Cursor Router, Cost / Balance / Intelligence modes	Shared Gemini quota drawn at API pricing
Admin visibility	Dashboard limits split by pool, spend alerts by Slack or email	Baseline quota usage in settings; Google Cloud billing
Hard stop available	Not described on the pricing pages	Yes, AI Credit Overages set to Never

That last row matters more than it looks. Antigravity's Never setting is a genuine hard stop: the developer waits for the refresh instead of generating a bill. Cursor's controls are alerting and seat right-sizing, which is faster to act on but does not stop spend by itself.

Cursor's routing layer deserves its own note. Cursor Router's default Cost mode carries fixed token rates of $1.25 per 1M input, $6.00 per 1M output and $0.25 per 1M cache read, while Balance and Intelligence modes bill at whichever model the request lands on. Router launches on Teams and Enterprise first, with individual plans following a few months later, and Enterprise teams start with Router off until an admin opts in. Our note on request-level model routing goes deeper on when Cost mode pays for itself.

Gap 5: what the seat maths actually looks like

Cursor's annual pricing is the number to plan against, because the monthly rate is 25% higher on both team seats.

Team size	All Standard, annual ($32/seat)	All Standard, monthly ($40/seat)	90% Standard + 10% Premium, annual
20 developers	$640/month	$800/month	$768/month
50 developers	$1,600/month	$2,000/month	$1,920/month
100 developers	$3,200/month	$4,000/month	$3,840/month
200 developers	$6,400/month	$8,000/month	$7,680/month

Those are seat costs at list, computed from Cursor's published rates, before any on-demand usage above the pooled allowances. The mixed column assumes one in ten developers on a Premium seat at $96 annual, which is the shape Cursor's own power-user data implies.

There is no equivalent table for Antigravity, and that is the finding rather than a gap in the research. On individual plans you are counting subscriptions at $0, $20, $100 or $200 per developer per month depending on how hard each one drives the agent, with no contract to consolidate them. On the enterprise path you are counting tokens through Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform, which means your first month is a measurement exercise. Budget for that month rather than guessing at it.

The honest framing for a CFO is that Cursor converts a variable cost into a mostly fixed one and charges a margin for the conversion, while Antigravity hands you the variable cost directly. Neither is cheaper in the abstract. Our seat-mix cost analysis works through the Cursor side in detail, and the BYOK versus subscription maths covers when paying for tokens directly wins.

Where each one fits

Choose Cursor when you need a contracted team plan this quarter, when SCIM provisioning and audit logs are a security-review requirement rather than a nice-to-have, when finance wants a per-head number, or when your developers are spread across models and you want routing to arbitrate. Its published enterprise feature set is built for exactly this buyer, and Anysphere lists SOC 2 certification on its own site.

Choose Antigravity when your models must run inside your own Google Cloud project for data residency or private networking reasons, when you are already committed to Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform, when you want a hard spend stop rather than an alert, or when a large share of your developers will use an agent occasionally enough that a $0 individual plan genuinely covers them. Accept that your developers will work in Antigravity 2.0 or the CLI rather than the IDE, and that you will administer IAM roles and possibly a VPC Service Controls perimeter.

Run both for a fortnight before deciding. The free tiers on each side are wide enough to produce real evidence, and the thing you are actually measuring is not code quality. It is how many of your developers turn into power users once the agent is good, because that number is what makes one pricing model cheaper than the other.

What the platform shift means for the choice

The reason this decision keeps resurfacing is that the tools stopped being editors. Antigravity now spans four surfaces: the Antigravity 2.0 desktop application, which orchestrates multiple agents in parallel with dynamic subagents and scheduled background tasks; the CLI, which Google now steers Gemini CLI users toward; the SDK, which exposes the same agent harness Google runs internally and lets you host custom agent behaviours on your own infrastructure; and the IDE. Cursor has moved the same way, with agents, a CLI, cloud agents and a marketplace alongside the editor.

"The leap from single-turn prompts to collaborative, always-on agents changes how developers build software, and we're just getting started," wrote Varun Mohan, Director of Software Engineering at Google DeepMind, and Logan Kilpatrick of Google DeepMind, in Google's I/O 2026 developer post on 19 May 2026.

The procurement consequence is that you are no longer buying an editor licence per developer. You are buying compute that runs unattended. A scheduled task or a background subagent consumes quota whether or not anyone is typing, which is the mechanism behind both vendors' 2026 pricing changes and the reason a per-seat model and a per-token model now produce very different bills for the same team.

India-specific considerations

Three things change the maths for teams building from India.

Data residency has a concrete answer on the Antigravity side and a contractual one on the Cursor side. Antigravity's enterprise integration exists specifically to satisfy private networking and data residency requirements by running models in your own Google Cloud project, but the three currently offered endpoints are global, multi-region EU and multi-region US. If your requirement is that inference stays in India, confirm the endpoint list before you design around it, because the published set does not include an India-specific option.

Source code in an agent's context window is company data, and under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 any personal data that ends up in prompts is being processed by whoever runs the model. The relevant controls are the same ones you would apply to any vendor: know which terms apply, Google Cloud's or a consumer subscription's, and know whether request and response logging is on.

Dollar-denominated seats against rupee budgets favour the annual commitment. Cursor's own gap between $32 and $40 a seat is 25%, which on 100 developers is $9,600 a year of pure billing-cycle choice.

FAQ

Does Antigravity offer a paid team or organisation plan?

Not by contract. Antigravity's plans documentation states there is currently no support for organisational tiers via contract, and no bring-your-own-key or bring-your-own-endpoint. Teams either use individual Google AI subscriptions or connect through Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform on Google Cloud, which bills on consumption rather than seats.

What does Antigravity cost for an individual developer?

The individual plan is generally available at $0 a month, including agent access to Gemini models, Claude Sonnet and Opus 4.6, gpt-oss-120b, unlimited Tab completions and unlimited Command requests under basic weekly rate limits. Paid quota comes from Google AI Pro at $20 a month or Google AI Ultra at $100 or $200.

How much does Cursor cost for a team?

Teams Standard is $40 per seat per month, or $32 per seat on annual billing. Teams Premium, introduced on 1 June 2026, is $120 per seat monthly or $96 annually and carries 5x the Standard included usage for 3x the cost. Teams can mix seat types freely across the organisation.

Does Antigravity support MCP servers?

Yes. Antigravity's documentation carries dedicated MCP pages for Antigravity 2.0, the Antigravity CLI, the Antigravity SDK and the Antigravity IDE, alongside Skills, Rules, Plugins, Hooks and Sidecars. Comparison articles claiming otherwise are describing an earlier state of the product and should be checked against the docs.

Can enterprise developers use the Antigravity IDE?

No. Google's enterprise setup guide states that integration with Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform is only supported for Antigravity 2.0 and the Antigravity CLI, and that the Antigravity IDE is not supported for enterprise customers. Teams needing models inside their own Google Cloud project must work in those two surfaces.

How do the two handle overspend?

Cursor uses seat right-sizing, a dashboard showing proximity to each usage pool, and spend alerts on dollar thresholds delivered through Slack or email. Antigravity uses an AI Credit Overages setting with two values, Never and Always. Never is a genuine hard stop: the developer waits for the quota refresh.

What changed in Google AI subscription pricing for Antigravity?

On 19 May 2026 Google introduced a $100 a month AI Ultra tier and cut its top AI Ultra tier from $250 to $200. The $100 tier carries 5X the token rate limit of the $20 Google AI Pro plan and the $200 tier carries 20X. AI credits moved out of base plans and became an overage mechanism.

What administration does the Antigravity enterprise path require?

A Google Cloud project with billing enabled, the Agent Platform API enabled, which needs the Service Usage Admin role, and the Agent Platform User role granted to each developer. Organisations running a service perimeter must add the Agent Platform API to their VPC Service Controls configuration before developers can connect.

How eCorpIT can help

eCorpIT runs senior engineering teams across India and abroad, and we make this exact call for client teams before a rollout rather than after one. We benchmark both tools against a real repository, model the seat-versus-consumption cost on your own developer mix, set up the Google Cloud project, IAM roles and VPC Service Controls if the Antigravity path wins, and design the agent workflows to be reviewable rather than opaque. We are CMMI Level 5, MSME Certified and ISO 27001:2022 certified, and we work with AWS, Microsoft and Google. If you are choosing an AI development platform for 20 to 200 engineers, talk to us and we will run the comparison on your codebase.

References

1. Google Antigravity pricing — the generally available $0 individual plan, model list and organisation plan via Google Cloud.
2. Google Antigravity plans documentation — baseline quota, five-hour refresh cadence, AI Credit Overages setting, and the absence of BYO-key and contracted organisational tiers.
3. Changes to Antigravity Plans, 19 May 2026 — the $100 AI Ultra tier, the $250 to $200 reduction, 5X and 20X multipliers, shared Gemini quota, and AI credits as overage.
4. Getting started with Antigravity and Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform — IAM roles, Agent Platform API, VPC Service Controls, endpoint locations, and the IDE exclusion.
5. Building the agentic future: developer highlights from I/O 2026, Google, 19 May 2026 — Antigravity 2.0, CLI, SDK and enterprise surfaces, plus the Mohan and Kilpatrick quote.
6. Google Antigravity MCP documentation — MCP support in Antigravity 2.0.
7. Antigravity IDE MCP documentation — MCP support in the IDE surface.
8. Cursor pricing and plans — the full plan table, Cursor Router rates, and Enterprise feature list.
9. Improvements to Teams Pricing, Cursor, 1 June 2026 — Premium seat, annual and monthly rates, dual usage pools, spend alerts, and the 1 July 2026 renewal date.
10. Cursor pricing page — the public plan comparison.
11. Cursor team pricing documentation — team billing reference.
12. Cursor models and pricing documentation — usage pools and Auto modes.
13. Higher Antigravity rate limits for Google AI Pro and Ultra subscribers, Google — how subscription tier maps to Antigravity quota.

Last updated: 3 August 2026.