TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Cursor

    Score9.5 out of 10
    N/ACursor is an IDE and code editor built for programming with AI. Cursor includes an autocomplete that predicts the next edit. Once enabled, it is always on and will suggest edits to code across multiple lines.

    $20

    per month

    GoCD

    Score8 out of 10
    N/AGoCD, from ThoughtWorks in Chicago, is an application lifecycle management and development tool.N/A
    Pricing
    CursorGoCD
    Editions & Modules
    Pro
    $20
    per month
    Teams
    $40
    per month per user
    Pro+
    $60
    per month
    Ultra
    $200
    per month
    Enterprise
    Custom
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    CursorGoCD
    Free Trial
    YesNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    YesNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional DetailsEvery plan includes a set amount of model usage. Additional usage is based on the models and features used. The Bugbot add-on is available at $40 per month, per user, or with Custom pricing for Enterprise customers. A discount is available for annual billing.—
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    CursorGoCD
    Considered Both Products
    SpaceX
    No answer on this topic
    ThoughtWorks
    No answer on this topic
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    100%
    Would buy again
    9 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Delivers good value for the price
    100%
    Delivers good value for the price
    9 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Happy with the feature set
    100%
    Happy with the feature set
    9 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    100%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    9 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation went as expected
    100%
    Implementation went as expected
    9 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Best Alternatives
    CursorGoCD
    Small Businesses
    No answers on this topic
    Apache Maven
    Score9.1 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    No answers on this topic
    Apache Maven
    Score9.1 out of 10
    Enterprises
    No answers on this topic
    Gradle Build Tool (Open Source)
    Score9 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    CursorGoCD
    Likelihood to Recommend
    9.5
    (10 ratings)
    9.0
    (2 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    10.0
    (2 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Usability
    9.2
    (10 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    CursorGoCD
    Likelihood to Recommend
    SpaceX
    Less appropriate for people who don't use LLMs to code but instead to create artifacts. Cursor is a fluid development platform, not something that will create an artifact to run in the cloud. Well designed to work on teams, to manage the code and how the LLMs interact with the code itself. Great for deep vibe coding.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ThoughtWorks
    Previously, our team used Jenkins. However, since it's a shared deployment resource we don't have admin access. We tried GoCD as it's open source and we really like. We set up our deployment pipeline to run whenever codes are merged to master, run the unit test and revert back if it doesn't pass. Once it's deployed to the staging environment, we can simply do 1-click to deploy the appropriate version to production. We use this to deploy to an on-prem server and also AWS. Some deployment pipelines use custom Powershell script for.Net application, some others use Bash script to execute the docker push and cloud formation template to build elastic beanstalk.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    SpaceX
    • API creation.
    • Integrations
    • Plan mode for large tasks.
    • Refactoring.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ThoughtWorks
    • Pipeline-as-Code works really well. All our pipelines are defined in yml files, which are checked into SCM.
    • The ability to link multiple pipelines together is really cool. Later pipelines can declare a dependency to pick up the build artifacts of earlier ones.
    • Agents definition is really great. We can define multiple different kinds of environments to best suit our diverse build systems.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    SpaceX
    • The CLI agent can be quite finicky via ACP.
    • It can be hard to understand how much different models will cost.
    • Support can be unresponsive.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ThoughtWorks
    • UI can be improved
    • Location for settings can be re-arranged
    • API for setting up pipeline
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    SpaceX
    Cursor is the best AI-powered IDE available today. The agents intelligently absorb context from the code, memory, and rules, and are capable of iterating with subagents until acceptance criteria is met.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ThoughtWorks
    No answers on this topic
    Usability
    SpaceX
    Cursor is useful for all our developer team. Each and every team member use Cursor for coding and also Cursor has various models like composer, codex, claude and openai models which helps a lot for quality codings. Also Cursor help to create documents in md file format with markdown and preview which helps a lot.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ThoughtWorks
    No answers on this topic
    Alternatives Considered
    SpaceX
    graphical user interface is really the thing that setting apart because other code harnesses are really focused on commandline interfaces but whenever you want a good graphical interface with all of the tools and workflow that us software developers we want I think that Cursor is the one that has done it the best out of all of the code harnesses that we’ve tried
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ThoughtWorks
    GoCD is easier to setup, but harder to customize at runtime. There's no way to trigger a pipeline with custom parameters.
    Jenkins is more flexible at runtime. You can define multiple user-provided parameters so when user needs to trigger a build, there's a form for him/her to input the parameters.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    SpaceX
    • Development speed increased at least 25%
    • The result of the final Product is better than before/without it
    • We use it as a standard now
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ThoughtWorks
    • ROI has been good since it's open source
    • Settings.xml need to be backed up periodically. It contains all the settings for your pipelines! We accidentally deleted before and we have to restore and re-create several missing pipelines
    • More straight forward use of API and allows filtering e.g., pull all pipelines triggered after this date
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots