Google Antigravity vs Cursor: Which AI Coding Tool Is Better? (2026)

The AI-powered code editor space has exploded in 2026, and two tools have emerged as the leading contenders: Google's Antigravity and Cursor. Both promise to fundamentally change how developers write code by embedding powerful AI directly into the editing experience. But they take very different approaches to achieving that goal.

This comparison breaks down everything you need to know -- features, pricing, model support, performance, and developer experience -- so you can make an informed decision about which tool deserves a place in your workflow.

What Is Google Antigravity?

Google Antigravity (codenamed "Project Antigravity" during development) is Google's AI-native code editor that launched in late 2025. Built from the ground up around Gemini models, it is not a fork of VS Code or any existing editor. Antigravity is a fully new IDE that treats AI as a first-class citizen rather than a plugin bolted onto an existing editor.

Key characteristics:

Built natively around Google's Gemini models
Deep integration with Google Cloud services
Designed for large codebase understanding
Available as a desktop app and cloud-based IDE

What Is Cursor?

Cursor is an AI-first code editor built on top of VS Code, launched in 2023 and rapidly iterated since. It supports multiple AI models (including GPT-4o, Claude, and Gemini) and has built a reputation for excellent developer experience and powerful code generation capabilities.

Key characteristics:

Built on VS Code (familiar interface, supports VS Code extensions)
Multi-model support (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google)
Strong community and rapid iteration
Available as a desktop app

Feature-by-Feature Comparison

Feature	Google Antigravity	Cursor
Base Editor	Custom-built IDE	VS Code fork
AI Models	Gemini 3.0, Gemini 2.5 Pro	GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini (configurable)
Code Completion	Yes (inline, multi-line)	Yes (inline, multi-line)
Chat Interface	Yes (side panel)	Yes (side panel + inline)
Codebase Indexing	Yes (entire repo)	Yes (entire repo)
Multi-file Editing	Yes (AI-driven refactoring)	Yes (Composer mode)
Terminal Integration	Yes (AI-assisted terminal)	Yes (AI-assisted terminal)
VS Code Extensions	No (own ecosystem)	Yes (full compatibility)
Git Integration	Yes	Yes
Remote Development	Yes (Cloud Workstations)	Yes (SSH)
Language Support	All major languages	All major languages
Offline Mode	Limited	No
Team Features	Yes (built-in)	Yes (Business plan)

AI Capabilities Compared

Code Completion

Google Antigravity uses Gemini 3.0 Flash for inline completions, which provides fast, contextually aware suggestions. It excels at understanding Google-ecosystem code (Android, Flutter, Google Cloud) and can complete multi-line blocks with high accuracy.

Cursor uses a mix of models for completions. Its "Tab" completions are fast and accurate, and it supports configuring which model handles different tasks. Cursor's completions are particularly strong for web development stacks (React, Next.js, TypeScript).

Verdict: Roughly equal in quality, with each having strengths in different ecosystems.

Chat and Code Generation

Google Antigravity's chat panel is powered by Gemini 3.0 Pro, which can process your entire codebase context (up to 2 million tokens). This means you can ask questions about your project architecture, and it will understand the full picture. It also supports image and diagram inputs for UI generation.

Cursor's chat supports multiple models and lets you tag specific files using @filename syntax. The Composer feature allows multi-file code generation from a single prompt. Cursor also supports image inputs for UI-to-code workflows.

Verdict: Antigravity has the edge on raw context window size. Cursor has the edge on flexibility with multiple models and the Composer workflow.

Codebase Understanding

Google Antigravity indexes your entire repository and builds a semantic understanding of the codebase. It can answer questions like "Where is the authentication middleware defined?" or "What would break if I changed this interface?" with high accuracy.

Cursor also indexes your codebase and provides similar functionality through its @codebase mention in chat. It uses a combination of embeddings and AST analysis to understand code structure.

Verdict: Both are strong here. Antigravity's larger context window gives it a theoretical advantage for very large codebases.

Multi-file Editing

Google Antigravity offers an "Autopilot" mode that can make coordinated changes across multiple files. You describe what you want ("Add pagination to the users API endpoint"), and it modifies the route handler, database query, types, and tests in a single operation.

Cursor's Composer mode provides similar functionality. You describe a change, and it generates edits across multiple files that you can review and apply individually or all at once.

Verdict: Both tools handle this well. Cursor's review-before-apply workflow feels slightly safer for production code.

Pricing Comparison

Plan	Google Antigravity	Cursor
Free Tier	Yes (limited AI requests)	Yes (2,000 completions + 50 premium requests/month)
Individual	$19/month	$20/month
Team/Business	$35/user/month	$40/user/month
Enterprise	Custom pricing	Custom pricing
Pay-as-you-go AI	Not available	Not available

Pricing is very similar between the two tools. Google Antigravity's slight price advantage at the team level may matter for larger organizations.

Developer Experience

Setup and Onboarding

Google Antigravity requires learning a new editor. While it has a clean, modern interface, developers coming from VS Code will face a learning curve. Keyboard shortcuts are different, the extension ecosystem is nascent, and some familiar features may be missing or work differently.

Cursor feels instantly familiar to any VS Code user. Your existing extensions, themes, keybindings, and settings carry over. The AI features are additive -- you can use Cursor exactly like VS Code and gradually adopt the AI capabilities.

Verdict: Cursor wins decisively for ease of adoption.

Performance

Google Antigravity is generally fast, but its custom rendering engine occasionally shows rough edges -- particularly with very large files (10K+ lines) and complex syntax highlighting.

Cursor inherits VS Code's mature, battle-tested performance characteristics. It handles large files and complex projects reliably.

Verdict: Cursor is more stable and predictable in performance.

Extension Ecosystem

Google Antigravity has its own extension marketplace, which is still growing. Core extensions for major languages and frameworks exist, but niche tools may not be available yet.

Cursor has access to the entire VS Code extension marketplace -- thousands of extensions covering every language, framework, and development workflow imaginable.

Verdict: Cursor wins overwhelmingly due to VS Code extension compatibility.

Who Should Choose Google Antigravity?

Google Cloud developers who want deep integration with GCP services
Android and Flutter developers who benefit from Gemini's strong understanding of these ecosystems
Teams already invested in Google Workspace who want a unified experience
Developers working with very large codebases who need the extended context window
Early adopters who want to be on the cutting edge of Google's AI tooling

Who Should Choose Cursor?

VS Code users who want AI capabilities without switching editors
Developers who want model flexibility (switch between GPT-4o, Claude, and Gemini)
Web developers working with React, Next.js, TypeScript, and similar stacks
Teams with existing VS Code configurations and extension dependencies
Anyone who values a mature, stable editing experience over cutting-edge features

The Third Option: Use Both

Many developers in 2026 use both tools for different purposes. Antigravity for large-scale refactoring and codebase exploration (leveraging its massive context window), and Cursor for day-to-day coding (leveraging its familiar interface and extension ecosystem). Since both are available on free tiers, there is no cost to experimenting.

Conclusion

Both Google Antigravity and Cursor are excellent AI coding tools, but they serve slightly different audiences. Cursor is the safer, more practical choice for most developers thanks to its VS Code foundation, multi-model support, and mature ecosystem. Google Antigravity is the more ambitious tool that may ultimately offer deeper AI integration, but it requires committing to a new editor and ecosystem.

If your development workflow also includes creating visual content -- marketing assets, product demos, or educational videos -- Hypereal AI integrates well with both tools through its API. Generate AI avatars, text-to-video content, and images programmatically to complement the code you write in whichever editor you choose.