Antigravity vs Cursor: the short answer
Choose Google Antigravity if you want to delegate broader, multi-step coding tasks to agents and monitor their work across workspaces. Choose Cursor if you want an AI coding environment centered on editing and reviewing code, with the option to use your own supported model API key for chat on eligible plans. Both support agentic coding; neither is a universal winner, and this comparison does not establish that one produces better code or finishes tasks faster.
One distinction matters if you work with production model APIs: using an AI model inside your coding tool is not the same as connecting an application you ship to a production model API. Cursor documents BYOK for supported chat models; on its current individual Premium, Super, and Ultra plans, those requests are billed by the provider and do not count against included usage or prepaid credit. Custom keys work only with chat models; Tab completion continues to use Cursor’s built-in models. Antigravity’s app does not support BYOK or custom endpoints for additional rate limits. Google separately documents an Antigravity SDK and Gemini API for building agents or applications. Those are different routes, with separate access and billing considerations. (Cursor BYOK documentation; Antigravity plans)
Cursor plan names, prices, and BYOK terms below were checked against its official pages on November 8, 2026. Google’s Antigravity plan rules were also checked; a directly comparable US monthly price for the Google AI plans was not established here.
At a glance
| Decision point | Google Antigravity | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| Core workflow | Offers an Editor View and a Manager surface for dispatching and observing agents working asynchronously across workspaces. Google describes agents working across the editor, terminal, and browser, with artifacts such as plans and screenshots for review. | Cursor Agent works in the editor, can search and edit files, run terminal commands, and control a browser. Cursor also documents Projects in which a coordinator agent can plan larger work and delegate to other agents. |
| Good fit when | You want to hand off a multi-step task, let agents work across tools, and inspect progress and deliverables. | You want AI assistance close to the code, with direct access to editing, terminal, browser, and model choices. |
| Model choices | Google documents Google and partner-provider models, with availability dependent on plan. | Cursor offers its own models and, depending on plan, third-party models. Its BYOK feature works for supported chat models on eligible plans. |
| Production API | The Antigravity app is not itself your deployed application’s model API. Google separately documents the Antigravity SDK and Gemini API. The app’s plans page says it does not support BYOK or custom endpoints for additional rate limits. | On individual Premium, Super, and Ultra plans, BYOK chat requests use your provider key: your provider bills you, and the requests do not draw from included usage or prepaid credit. Custom keys do not apply to Tab completion. Team and Enterprise plans have a different Cursor Token Rate condition. |
| Cost shape | All plans have a baseline quota; rate limits and model access vary by plan. Google AI Pro and Ultra users can use purchased AI credits for overages. A directly comparable US monthly price for the required Google AI plan was not established here, so treat the total price as unresolved. | Official pricing lists Free at $0/month, Plus at $8/month, Premium at $30/month, Super at $100/month, and Ultra at $200/month. Cursor is sold as part of The X Subscription, with a weekly included usage pool shared between Grok and Cursor. Third-party model usage is not included in the subscription price and is billed separately. |
| Main trade-off | More emphasis on delegation and orchestration; quotas are task-dependent and Google says they may change. BYOK/custom endpoints are not supported for adding rate limits. | More direct in-editor agent workflow and BYOK for eligible chat use; plan eligibility, shared included usage, and separate third-party model charges matter. |
Google describes Antigravity’s editor-and-manager workflow in its product announcement and documents shared app/CLI agent features. Cursor’s docs describe its Agent tools, Projects, and supported model-key options. These are product descriptions, not head-to-head performance results. (Google’s Antigravity announcement; Cursor Agent overview; Cursor pricing; The X Subscription overview)
How the day-to-day workflows differ
Antigravity: delegate a task, then inspect its work
Antigravity combines a hands-on editor with a Manager surface for multiple agents working asynchronously. Google describes tasks in which an agent can make a code change, launch the app from the terminal, and use a browser to check the result. It can also produce artifacts such as implementation plans, screenshots, and walkthroughs for a developer to review. These are documented workflows and examples—not proof that the agent will correctly complete every task without supervision. (Google’s Antigravity announcement)
That setup may suit developers handling work that naturally spans files and tools—for example, asking an agent to investigate a bug, make a fix, and run a check—especially if they want to monitor progress while staying focused elsewhere. Review generated changes and test results before merging or shipping.
Cursor: work with an agent alongside your code
Cursor’s Agent can search the codebase, edit files, run terminal commands, and control a browser. For larger jobs, Cursor documents a Project workflow in which a coordinator agent plans and delegates work. Its Composer 2.5 model page describes tool use for file edits, terminal operations, and browser testing. Cursor agents can perform multi-step tasks too; the difference is not simply “autonomous versus manual.” (Cursor Agent overview; Composer 2.5)
Cursor may be a better fit if you prefer to stay close to individual edits, steer the agent as it works, and select from its available models. Its browser tool can inspect pages, screenshots, console logs, and network traffic; that is useful for debugging a web application, but it does not guarantee that an agent’s diagnosis is right. (Cursor browser tool)
Practical choice: If the work is best framed as “take this outcome and carry out several steps,” try Antigravity’s delegated workflow. If it is “help me understand and modify this code while I steer,” try Cursor’s in-editor workflow. Both can cross that line; this is a workflow preference, not a measured capability ranking.
What production model API work changes
“Production model API” can mean two different things. Keep these use cases separate:
- Use a provider model while coding. Cursor documents BYOK for supported chat models, including standard OpenAI chat models, Anthropic API models, Gemini models through the Google AI API, models deployed in Azure OpenAI Service, and models available in your AWS Bedrock configuration. For individual Premium, Super, and Ultra plans, Cursor says BYOK requests are billed by the provider and do not count against included usage or prepaid credit. The same documentation lists legacy Pro, Pro+, and Ultra plans with that treatment. Team and Enterprise plans differ: Cursor’s Token Rate still applies on models that include it. Custom keys work only with chat models; Tab completion continues to use Cursor’s built-in models. Free and Plus are not listed among the individual plans eligible for the documented no-included-usage BYOK treatment. (Cursor BYOK documentation; AWS Bedrock setup guide)
- Ship an application that calls a model API. Your application needs its own provider integration, credentials, security, and billing setup. Cursor’s BYOK setting configures requests from Cursor; it does not configure the API integration in the application you deploy. Google separately documents Gemini API billing, which is distinct from a coding-tool subscription. (Gemini API billing)
Antigravity’s app may let you choose among documented models, subject to plan and availability, but its plans page says the app currently does not support BYOK or custom endpoints for additional rate limits. Google also documents a separate Antigravity SDK, a Python SDK for building agents. Treat the SDK as a separate development route—not as evidence that the Antigravity coding app is a general production model API or that an app’s API costs are included in an Antigravity plan. (Antigravity models; Antigravity plans; Antigravity SDK overview)
Example: Suppose a team uses Cursor with an Anthropic key to ask questions about code, then deploys a service that calls Gemini. The Anthropic key and its provider charges relate to Cursor’s chat requests; the deployed service needs its own Gemini API setup and billing. Choosing Antigravity or Cursor does not remove that production integration work. This example illustrates the billing distinction in the providers’ documentation; it is not a test of either tool.
Cost and access: what to compare before buying
Cursor: The official pricing page lists individual plans at Free ($0/month), Plus ($8/month), Premium ($30/month), Super ($100/month), and Ultra ($200/month). It describes Cursor as part of The X Subscription. Cursor’s help documentation says Grok and Cursor share a weekly included usage pool under that subscription; paid plans include a pool for Cursor models, while third-party models are not included. The pricing page says third-party model usage must be purchased separately. Compare the shared pool and the plan’s model access—not just the dollar figure—against your expected use. The cited pricing terms do not establish a separate annual-billing commitment. Prices may change and applicable taxes or fees may be extra. (Cursor pricing; The X Subscription overview; Cursor models and pricing)
Antigravity: Google documents a baseline quota across plans. Users without Google AI Pro or Ultra receive a quota that refreshes weekly; Pro users get a higher quota refreshed every five hours until the weekly limit is reached, and Ultra users get the highest quota, also refreshed every five hours, plus access to third-party models. Google says agent work consumes quota according to the work performed, and limits can change. Pro and Ultra users can use purchased AI credits for overages above the baseline; Google states that these credits are consumed at standard Gemini Enterprise consumption pricing. BYOK and custom endpoints are not supported for adding rate limits. The plan documentation does not establish a directly comparable US monthly price here, so check the current Google AI plan price and any credit costs before comparing total spend with Cursor. (Antigravity plans; Google AI plans)
For either product, estimate total cost using your real workflow: the coding-tool or Google AI plan, model usage beyond included quota, and separate provider/API charges for your deployed application. If a team needs administrative controls, identity management, usage limits, or governance, compare the relevant team or enterprise terms rather than extrapolating from individual plans.
Who should choose which?
Choose Antigravity if…
- You want a Manager-style surface for dispatching and observing multiple agents working asynchronously.
- Your tasks often involve a chain across editor, terminal, and browser, and you value reviewing artifacts such as plans or screenshots.
- You are already considering a Google AI plan or Google Cloud-based workflow, and its model access and quota rules fit your needs.
Trade-off: It is not a documented BYOK/custom-endpoint route for increasing the app’s rate limits, and agent quotas are task-dependent. If bringing a specific provider key into your editor is a must-have, verify the current product behavior before choosing it. (Antigravity plans)
Choose Cursor if…
- You want agent tools directly in an editor workflow for code search, edits, terminal work, and browser checks.
- You want to use a supported provider key for chat requests on an eligible plan and are prepared for provider billing. For individual Premium, Super, and Ultra plans, Cursor documents that those BYOK requests do not use included usage or prepaid credit; custom keys still do not apply to Tab completion.
- You want a clearly listed range of individual subscription tiers and can identify which shared usage pool and model access your work requires.
Trade-off: The subscription price does not cover third-party model usage. BYOK in Cursor is not a substitute for setting up and paying for the API used by your deployed application. (Cursor pricing; Cursor BYOK documentation)
Bottom line
For task delegation and agent orchestration, start by evaluating Antigravity. For hands-on coding with an in-editor agent and documented BYOK chat on eligible plans, start with Cursor. If your deciding requirement is a production model API, choose based on the provider, SDK, deployment, and billing architecture your application needs—not on the coding tool’s model picker alone. There is no verified basis here for claiming a universal winner on speed, code quality, or reliability.
Sources
Plans | Google Antigravity Docs
Bring your own API key | Cursor Docs
What is The X Subscription? | Cursor Docs
Models & Pricing | Cursor Docs
Build with Google Antigravity, our new agentic development platform