Cursor vs. IBM Bob

IBM Bob

Overview
Product	Rating	Most Used By	Product Summary	Starting Price
Cursor	Score 9.5 out of 10	N/A	Cursor 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
IBM Bob	Score 7.5 out of 10	N/A	IBM Bob is an AI-assisted development tool designed to support developers across the software development lifecycle. It helps interpret developer intent and provides assistance when working with real-world codebases by using contextual awareness of the surrounding project.	N/A

Pricing

Cursor

IBM Bob

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
Cursor	IBM Bob
Free Trial
Yes	No
Free/Freemium Version
Yes	No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No	No

Entry-level Setup Fee

No setup fee

Additional Details

Every 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

Pricing Info

Community Pulse
	Cursor	IBM Bob
Considered Both Products	Cursor KM Krisnananda Mahapatra Software Engineer Chose Cursor Cursor is fast and cheap, but for some tasks I can't rely on it; I use Claude Code for more complex tasks or to enhance the UI. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose Cursor We use both Claude Code and Cursor. However, we find Cursor to be quite fast compared to Claude Code. Claude Code seems to be able to reach higher levels of intelligence, though that's not really necessary much of the time. The speed of Cursor can really stand out in comparison. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose Cursor Cursor is superior because its integration is easy; it provides the same benefits as the others, but it does so by managing LLMs in a more intuitive way. The fact that it is now proprietary to SpaceXAI might make the use of Grok more efficient and maybe cheaper for users … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose Cursor Cursor contains multiple AI model from different LLM Model builders, so Cursor stacks up against them with even their model also and other models also and gives a free composer model to do coding easily for the developers. Even when the token completed for the subscription … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose Cursor 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 … Incentivized Helpful? GJ Gregory Johnston Jr. Manager, Engineering Systems Chose Cursor Better agentic coding quality, inherent context of code by repo caching, easier to configure guardrails - these all amount to better quality code with less iteration and fussing around with the agent to get it to do what you want. Incentivized Helpful? Evelyn So, M.Sc Innovation UX Consultant Chose Cursor Softr's chat AI is less sophisticated. However, it is great for building simple database-driven webapps. I have used it together with Airtable to build a very simple webapp. It is drag and drop. Vercel V0's chatAI is faster and more friendly. The user interface is also … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose Cursor Cursor has built-in AI and is a fork based on Visual Studio Code. So the fact is, it is better than Visual Studio Code because of AI, and if you are a developer that uses more than notebooks, in my opinion, it surely beats Jupyter Notebook, too. It is my go-to for basically all … Incentivized Helpful?	IBM Bob SG Saurabh Gupta Principal Architect Chose IBM Bob Bob provides better integrations Specific AI work flows for Z/Mainframes put it way infront of other technologies that provide generic outputs versus Bob leveraging IBM's mainframe knowledge Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose IBM Bob IBM Bob stands out in legacy code revamping and transformation that helps in bridging the gap between the legacy code and developers who doesnt have expertize in the legacy codes. With Semgrep scanning, the code is developed with all security considerations, saving time on … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose IBM Bob I think IBM Bob has more robust features and can scale with larger code and datasets from what we've seen working with both tools Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose IBM Bob IBM Aspera on Cloud Incentivized Helpful?

User Ratings
	Cursor	IBM Bob
Likelihood to Recommend	9.7 (0 ratings)	7.3 (0 ratings)
Usability	9.3 (0 ratings)	7.0 (0 ratings)

User Testimonials
	Cursor	IBM Bob
Likelihood to Recommend	As I mentioned, it gets the job done well, and its models are fast- not as precise as I want them to be, but overall good. It can improve its UI and frontend skills so that it could match head-to-head with Anthropic's models. Incentivized KM Krisnananda Mahapatra Software Engineer Read full review	IBM Bob is best suited to work with legacy code as its difficult to find and train the resources for those legacy systems. Its works very well in handling full SLDC with documentation. Having said that, since it's still in the starting phase, some hallucination is observed and its still needs some human intervention during software development life cycles which will be improved over the time ofcourse Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review
Pros	Very fast code indexing. Multi agent experience. Great proprietary models. Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review	No answers on this topic
Cons	Very complex user interface As it generate codes for additional features, it sometimes affects existing funtions Black interface hard to read Evelyn So, M.Sc Innovation UX Consultant Read full review	No answers on this topic
Usability	it is really easy to set up and to connect with GitHub or any other git manager that you have and our team really loves the fact that whenever we do work, it’s very easy to open PRS for a Sr software staff to check the PRS and just merge it Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review	Overall IBM Bob is pretty intuitive and has a good UI to interact and design/debug code generated in one UI and solution. There are a few items that could be a bit more drag and drop and point and click to make even more business user friendly and look less IT or tech heavy. Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review
Alternatives Considered	Cursor is superior because its integration is easy; it provides the same benefits as the others, but it does so by managing LLMs in a more intuitive way. The fact that it is now proprietary to SpaceXAI might make the use of Grok more efficient and maybe cheaper for users compared to Claude and Gemini. Verified User Anonymous Read full review	Bob provides better integrations Specific AI work flows for Z/Mainframes put it way infront of other technologies that provide generic outputs versus Bob leveraging IBM's mainframe knowledge Incentivized SG Saurabh Gupta Principal Architect Read full review
Return on Investment	Mostly I have positive impact on Cursor only for implementing complex features and functionalities. Cursor mainly save our development time testing time more than 50%. Cursor helps to improve code quality of our all project folder and files. Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review	No answers on this topic
ScreenShots