Codex vs Cursor: which one should you build with?

updated · #2 vs #6 in ai coding agents & IDEs · prices checked

$ which one should you use?

want ai woven through a proper editor, with tab, agent and cloud agents in one place? Cursor. already paying for ChatGPT, or want an agent that picks up GitHub issues and reviews PRs while you're down the pub? OpenAI Codex.

Cursor ranks higher on our board: #2 vs #6 of 13 coding agents, 8.5/10 vs 8.0/10.

#2 of 13 in coding agents

Cursor

numptr says8.5/10

Tab, agent and cloud agents in one editor. Plus is $8/mo, Grok models only.

best for
developers who want ai inside a full editor
why 8.5
Plus at $8 is Grok models only. Premium at $30 is where it gets proper.

full Cursor review

#6 of 13 in coding agents

OpenAI Codex

numptr says8.0/10

already paying for ChatGPT? you've basically got it. crack on.

best for
ChatGPT subscribers who want a cloud + local coding agent
why 8.0
bundled into every ChatGPT plan, even Free with limits.

full OpenAI Codex review

who wins for which job

you want ai inside a full editor

Cursor

best for: developers who want ai inside a full editor.

you already pay for ChatGPT

OpenAI Codex

already paying for ChatGPT? you've basically got it. crack on.

you want a cloud and local agent in one

OpenAI Codex

best for: ChatGPT subscribers who want a cloud + local coding agent.

you want to try it for free

OpenAI Codex

OpenAI Codex free tier: included in ChatGPT Free (limited usage). Cursor: limited ai usage.

overall, on our scores

Cursor

#2 of 13 coding agents, 8.5/10. OpenAI Codex: #6, 8.0/10.

the differences, side by side

rank

Cursor#2 of 13 in coding agents

OpenAI Codex#6 of 13 in coding agents

numptr score

Cursor8.5/10

OpenAI Codex8.0/10

best for

Cursordevelopers who want ai inside a full editor

OpenAI CodexChatGPT subscribers who want a cloud + local coding agent

free tier

Cursorlimited ai usage

OpenAI Codexincluded in ChatGPT Free (limited usage)

paid plans

CursorPlus $8/mo, Grok models only; Premium $30/mo (4x usage; third-party models billed by usage); Super $100/mo; Ultra $200/mo; Teams $30+/user/mo

OpenAI Codexincluded in ChatGPT Go $8/mo, Plus $20/mo, Pro $100, $200 or $500/mo; Business $25/seat/mo ($20 annual); or pay API rates with an API key

affiliate

Cursorno affiliate programme found. doesn't touch the rank.

OpenAI Codexno affiliate programme found. doesn't touch the rank.

price checked

Cursor2026-10-22 at cursor.com/pricing

OpenAI Codex2026-10-22 at developers.openai.com/codex/pricing

# straight from our rankings data. prices from each vendor's own page.

pick neither if

go deeper

quick answer: Codex vs Cursor comes down to where you want the ai to live. Cursor ranks higher on our board (#2 of 13 coding agents, 8.5/10) because it's the best place to have ai inside a full editor: tab, an agent and cloud agents in one window. OpenAI Codex (#6, 8.0/10) wins if ChatGPT is already on your card, or if you want an agent you mostly hand jobs to rather than an editor you sit in. both beat neither, and plenty of people run one inside the other's editor anyway.

the short version

Cursor OpenAI Codex
our rank #2, 8.5/10 #6, 8.0/10
what it is an ai editor first, with an agent and cloud agents an agent first: desktop app, CLI, IDE extension, web and cloud
free limited ai usage included in ChatGPT Free (limited usage)
cheapest paid Plus $8/mo, Grok models only Go $8/mo, or Plus $20/mo for the CLI, IDE and web
cloud agents Premium ($30/mo) and up Plus ($20/mo) and up
ai code review Bugbot, Premium and up GitHub code review and automatic PR reviews, Plus and up
models Grok models in the plan; third-party models at API list price, billed separately OpenAI's own (GPT-6.1 Sol, GPT-6 Luna and friends)
when you run out top-offs, or wait for the weekly refresh buy ChatGPT credits, or use an API key at API rates

ranks and scores come straight from our coding agents board, and nobody pays to move up it.

why Cursor ranks higher

it's an editor, not a chat window bolted onto one. you get tab completions, an agent and cloud agents in the same place you read and edit code. for anyone who wants to stay hands on the keyboard and steer every diff, that's the better day out.

cloud agents and automations come with Premium. on Premium and up you also get Bugbot code reviews and code hosting via origin, so the editor, the background agents and the reviews all sit under one bill.

the catch is models. Plus at $8 is Grok models only. Premium and up give you a pool of Grok usage, but no allowance for third-party models: those are available in Cursor at API list price and billed separately. so if you want Claude or GPT models all day, budget for the meter as well as the plan. the full breakdown is in Cursor pricing.

where Codex wins

you've probably already paid for it. Codex comes with every ChatGPT plan, the free one included. on Free and Go it's GPT-6 Luna in the desktop app (OpenAI says that's still rolling out). Plus at $20 opens up Codex on the web, in the CLI, the IDE extension and on iOS.

it's built for handing jobs off. tag @codex on a GitHub issue or PR, switch on automatic PR reviews, or kick it off from Slack or Linear. cloud chats run on OpenAI's machines while yours gets on with something else. those cloud bits need a ChatGPT sign in: with an API key you get the CLI, SDK and IDE extension but no cloud features.

one model family, tuned for it. you're on OpenAI's models and nobody else's. that's simpler to reason about than a pool plus a separate meter, but it also means no Claude or Gemini inside Codex.

limits are honest about being fuzzy. OpenAI's own estimate for Plus is 15 to 160 local messages per five hours on GPT-6.1 Sol, depending on the task. Pro plans ($100, $200 or $500 a month) currently have no five-hour limit, though weekly limits may apply. more in Codex pricing.

which should you pick?

can you use both?

yes, and lots of people do. Cursor is the editor, Codex is the thing you hand a ticket to at 6 PM. the Codex CLI is a terminal program, so it runs happily in the terminal inside Cursor. if you're paying for both, though, check you actually need both before the second renewal lands.

the rest of the field

rank tool best for free tier paid from numptr score
#2 Cursor developers who want ai inside a full editor limited ai usage Plus $8/mo, Grok models only 8.5/10
#6 OpenAI Codex ChatGPT subscribers who want a cloud + local coding agent included in ChatGPT Free (limited usage) included in ChatGPT Go $8/mo, Plus $20/mo, Pro $100, $200 or $500/mo 8.0/10
#1 Claude Code delegating multi-file features from terminal or IDE no free access: Claude Code needs a paid Claude plan (Pro and up) Pro $20/mo 9.0/10
#3 OpenCode devs who want a Claude Code-style agent without being tied to one model free and open source (MIT); free models included, or bring your own key, or log in with GitHub Copilot or ChatGPT Plus/Pro optional OpenCode Go $10/mo or Go Plus $40/mo 8.5/10
#4 GitHub Copilot teams already on GitHub; budget-conscious devs limited chat and agent usage Pro $10/mo 8.0/10

faq

is Codex better than Cursor?

not on our board. Cursor sits at #2 with 8.5/10 and Codex at #6 with 8.0/10. Cursor wins on the editor; Codex wins on value if you already pay for ChatGPT, and on cloud tasks wired into GitHub.

is Codex free?

there's a limited version in ChatGPT Free (GPT-6 Luna in the desktop app, subject to rollout). the CLI, IDE extension, web and cloud integrations start at ChatGPT Plus, $20 a month.

is Cursor free?

there's a free plan with limited agent and chat requests. Plus is $8 a month (Grok models only), Premium is $30.

can i use GPT models in Cursor?

yes, on Premium and up, as third-party models at API list price, billed separately from your plan. on Plus it's Grok models only.

Codex CLI vs Cursor: which is better for the terminal?

Codex, as Cursor is an editor first. for a terminal agent, our top pick overall is Claude Code, and the open source pick is OpenCode.

sources

checked 2026-10-22

more guides

the numptr weekly

new launches and price changes worth knowing about, every monday. no spam, no fluff, leave whenever you fancy.