Claude Code vs Cursor vs GitHub Copilot

The AI assistant market for developers is exploding. Claude Code, Cursor, and GitHub Copilot are the three major solutions. Which one to choose? Let’s compare objectively.

For broader context on the state of AI in development, see my article AI and Development in 2025. And if you’re considering local alternatives, check out OpenAI GPT OSS vs Ollama.

Overview

Claude Code

Strengths

• Agentic: Can plan and execute complex tasks end-to-end
• Project context: CLAUDE.md, rules, hierarchical memory
• Extensible: Hooks, skills, subagents, MCP
• Terminal-native: Fast, scriptable, CI/CD integrable
• Autonomy: Can work on multiple files in sequence

Weaknesses

• Learning curve: #@/! syntax to master
• Price: More expensive than alternatives
• No integrated IDE: Requires your separate editor
• Less visual: No integrated graphical diff

Ideal for

• Terminal-first developers
• Complex multi-file projects
• CI/CD automation
• Advanced users seeking power

Cursor

Strengths

• Full IDE: VS Code fork with native AI
• Multi-model: GPT-4, Claude, local models
• Visual: Integrated diffs, contextual chat
• Composer: Agent mode for complex tasks
• Accessibility: Familiar VS Code interface

Weaknesses

• Locked in: Must use Cursor as IDE
• Limited terminal: No pure CLI usage
• Dependency: Fork that may diverge from VS Code
• Less extensible: Not as rich plugin system

Ideal for

• VS Code developers seeking native AI integration
• Teams wanting a unified tool
• Users preferring graphical interface
• Projects where visualization is important

GitHub Copilot

Strengths

• GitHub integration: Native PRs, Issues, Actions
• Accessible price: $10/month individual
• Ubiquity: Available in all major IDEs
• Real-time completion: Suggestions while typing
• Copilot Chat: Contextual conversation

Weaknesses

• Less agentic: No autonomous planning
• Limited context: Less suitable for large projects
• Microsoft-dependent: Tied to Microsoft ecosystem
• Less customizable: No rules, hooks, etc.

Ideal for

• AI assistant beginners
• Limited budget
• GitHub-centric projects
• Quick code completion

Detailed Comparison

Context Understanding

Agentic Capabilities

Customization

Pricing and Licenses

Compared Workflows

Module Refactoring

Claude Code:

> ultrathink. Refactor the auth module to use JWT.
> Make sure all tests pass.

→ Claude plans, modifies files, runs tests, fixes if needed.

Cursor:

1. Open Composer
2. Describe the refactoring
3. Review proposed changes
4. Accept/adjust
5. Run tests manually

Copilot:

1. Open Copilot Chat
2. Ask for refactoring suggestions
3. Apply file by file
4. Run tests manually

Bug Fix

Claude Code:

> The test UserService.test.ts fails at line 45.
> Find and fix the bug.

Cursor:

1. Right-click on error
2. “Fix with AI”
3. Review suggestion
4. Apply

Copilot:

1. Select problematic code
2. /fix in chat
3. Apply suggestion

New Project

Claude Code:

> Create a REST API with Express, TypeScript, Prisma.
> Structure according to best practices.
> Add JWT authentication.

Cursor:

1. Composer mode
2. Describe architecture
3. Generate file by file
4. Adjust as you go

Copilot:

1. Create files manually
2. Use suggestions for content
3. Copilot Chat for questions

When to Use What?

Use Claude Code if:

• You’re comfortable with terminal
• You work on complex projects
• You want automation (CI/CD, scripts)
• You need AI autonomy
• Budget is not the main constraint

Use Cursor if:

• You prefer VS Code
• You want an integrated experience
• You work visually (diffs)
• You want to switch models easily
• Moderate budget

Use Copilot if:

• You’re new to AI
• Limited budget
• You’re in the GitHub ecosystem
• You want real-time suggestions
• You use various IDEs

Recommended Combination

My personal stack:

┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Claude Code (terminal)                  │
│ - Complex tasks                         │
│ - Automation                            │
│ - CI/CD                                 │
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ VS Code + Copilot                       │
│ - Daily editing                         │
│ - Real-time completion                  │
│ - Quick fixes                           │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘

This combination offers:

• Claude’s power for heavy tasks
• Copilot’s speed for daily work
• Best of both worlds

Market Evolution

2024-2025 Trends

• More autonomy: Tools becoming more agentic
• Multi-model: LLM choice per task
• Integration: Less friction between tools
• Specialization: Tools by domain (web, mobile, data)

What’s Coming

• Claude Code continues adding agentic features
• Cursor pushes multi-model integration
• Copilot evolves toward more autonomy (Copilot Workspace)

Conclusion

There’s no universal “best” tool. The choice depends on:

1. Your workflow: Terminal vs GUI
2. Your budget: $10 to $200/month
3. Your needs: Completion vs Full Agent
4. Your ecosystem: GitHub, Anthropic, or neutral

My advice: try all three with their trial versions, then choose (or combine) according to your style.

What’s Coming Tomorrow

In Day 20, we’ll finish with a complete case study: how I used Claude Code to create Prelude of the Chambered Reborn.

This article is part of the “Master Claude Code in 20 Days” series. Day 18: Status line and terminal