Supermaven vs Cursor
Supermaven prioritizes blazing-fast autocomplete with a massive context window while Cursor offers a full AI-native IDE experience. This comparison shows how their code quality compares.
Supermaven focuses on being the fastest and most context-aware autocomplete tool available, built on a custom model optimized for low latency. Cursor takes a broader approach, integrating AI into every aspect of the IDE from autocomplete to chat to multi-file editing. They represent different philosophies about where AI assistance should be focused.
Head-to-head comparison
Code structure
CursorSupermaven
Supermaven's large context window enables highly accurate structural suggestions within complex files.
Cursor
Cursor's full codebase indexing produces structurally consistent suggestions across multiple files.
Security
CursorSupermaven
Supermaven does not include security scanning or vulnerability detection features.
Cursor
Cursor surfaces basic security hints but requires supplementary tooling for deep analysis.
Speed of prototyping
CursorSupermaven
Supermaven's low-latency autocomplete keeps developers in flow during rapid prototyping.
Cursor
Cursor's chat and multi-file editing accelerate complex feature prototyping beyond autocomplete.
Backend/data layer
CursorSupermaven
Supermaven handles backend code well within the context of the current file and adjacent context.
Cursor
Cursor reads your entire backend architecture and generates more accurate cross-file suggestions.
Deployment readiness
CursorSupermaven
Supermaven's contextually precise completions reduce errors but address only what is in context.
Cursor
Cursor's holistic understanding produces more complete, deployment-ready feature implementations.
Long-term maintainability
CursorSupermaven
Supermaven respects code style within its large context but does not track cross-file conventions.
Cursor
Cursor's full codebase indexing promotes consistency across the entire project over time.
Code quality
Cursor produces higher quality code across all multi-file and complex task dimensions. Supermaven excels specifically at fast, accurate single-file autocomplete with unmatched context depth.
Security
Neither tool provides deep security scanning. Both should be paired with dedicated security tooling, though Cursor at least surfaces basic inline hints.
Which should you choose?
Choose Supermaven if...
Use Supermaven as a fast autocomplete engine, potentially alongside a chat-focused tool for complex tasks.
Supermaven servicesChoose Cursor if...
Use Cursor for an all-in-one AI-native IDE experience that handles both autocomplete and complex agentic tasks.
Cursor servicesThe bottom line
Cursor is the more complete solution for full-stack AI-assisted development. Supermaven shines as a specialized, ultra-fast autocomplete tool, and some developers use both simultaneously.
Whichever tool you used, we'll review the code
Get a professional review of your AI-generated code at a fixed price.
Security Scan
Black-box review of your public-facing app. No code access needed.
- OWASP Top 10 checks
- SSL/TLS analysis
- Security headers
- Expert review within 24h
Code Audit
In-depth review of your source code for security, quality, and best practices.
- Security vulnerabilities
- Code quality review
- Dependency audit
- AI pattern analysis
Complete Bundle
Both scans in one package with cross-referenced findings.
- Everything in both products
- Cross-referenced findings
- Unified action plan
100% credited toward any paid service. Start with an audit, then let us fix what we find.
Frequently asked questions
Can Supermaven and Cursor be used at the same time?
Yes, Supermaven offers a VS Code extension that can run alongside Cursor, though this may cause completion conflicts.
Is Supermaven free?
Supermaven offers a free tier with usage limits and a paid Pro plan for unlimited completions.
Other comparisons
Cursor vs Lovable
Cursor produces more production-ready code but requires coding knowledge.
Cursor vs Bolt.new
Cursor gets closer to production-ready code.
Cursor vs v0
Cursor builds full-stack apps while v0 generates UI components.
Cursor vs GitHub Copilot
Cursor is more capable for building full features.
Not sure which tool to use?
We've reviewed code from every major AI coding tool. Book a free call and we'll help you understand what your code needs.