agentboards.org
Compare/Cursor vs Kun

CursorvsKun

Generated from the two spec rows. Green marks the better value where a spec has a clear direction. Everything else is just different.

Cursor
Anysphere · AI-native IDE
#12MCP
Panel
6.8
3 spec wins
Reliability
7.0
Usefulness
7.7
Cost
5.5
Longevity
6.8

“Twenty dollars a month, then 3x, then 20x, and the page never says 20x of what.”

Kun
KunAgent · AI-native IDE
#84MCP
Panel
5.8
1 spec wins
Reliability
5.7
Usefulness
6.2
Cost
6.5
Longevity
4.8

“It writes your code and also your slide deck, which is the most accurate description of an engineering week ever shipped as a feature list.”

Spec by spec

SpecCursorKun
Architecture
CategoryAI-native IDEAI-native IDE
Runslocal, cloudlocal
Platformsmacos, linux, windowsmacos, linux, windows
Context window200k default, up to 1M tokens on select modelsnot documented
Protocols
MCP clientYesYes
MCP serverNoNo
Capabilities
Runs terminal commandsYesYes
Multi-file editsYesYes
Git operationsYesYes
Browser controlYesYesBrowser output is attached to tasks and screenshots are captured through browser automation.
Sandboxed executionYesNo
Multi-agent orchestrationYesNo
Headless / CI modeYesNo
Models
BackboneClaude, GPT, Gemini, Grok, Composer, Kimi, GLMOpenAI, Claude, Gemini, Ollama, DeepSeek, Kimi, GLM, Qwen, MiniMax
Bring your own modelYesYour own keys reach the vendors' own models (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google) plus your own Azure OpenAI deployment or AWS Bedrock account; Tab completion always stays on Cursor's models. Yes
Local modelsNoCustom API keys are limited to OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Azure OpenAI and AWS Bedrock, with no documented base URL override, so Ollama, LM Studio or a self-hosted endpoint cannot be pointed at. YesOllama ships as a named provider preset, and base URLs are editable so any OpenAI-compatible or Anthropic-compatible endpoint can be added.
Cost
Pricing modelmixedbyok
Starts at$20/mon/a
Free tierYesYes
Bring your own keyYesYes
Openness
Open sourceNoNo
LicenseproprietaryPolyForm-Noncommercial-1.0.0
GitHub starsn/a6,324

Which one would each critic pick

CriticCursorKunPick
El Juez——not enough reviews
El Amigo7.86.3Cursor — The best editor experience today, with a subscription that turns into a meter the moment you push the agent hard.
El Crítico6.55.8Cursor — The sandbox is a property of the run mode you pick, and Run Everything drops it, while the pricing page turns limits into a ladder of tiers to climb.
El Profesor6.06.5Kun — The graphical client and the terminal client both attach to one local runtime, so threads, plans and approvals are shared state rather than two synchronised copies.
La Inversora8.35.0Cursor — Real revenue, real pricing power, an in-house model, and a dependency on the labs it competes with for every frontier request.
La Jefa7.54.8Cursor — Teams at $40 per user with SSO, but SCIM, audit logs and auto-run controls sit behind a custom Enterprise quote.
El Hacker4.56.5Kun — PolyForm Noncommercial, so I can read it and never ship a competing fork, but Ollama is a named preset and every base URL is editable.

Picks are derived from each critic's own scores. Humans vote on matchups on the duels page.

Want a third column? The compare tool handles any two agents. Three-way comparisons are on the roadmap once the spec rows are all verified.