Both tools can autocomplete code, answer questions about your project, and run an agent that edits several files from a plain-English request. The biggest difference is where they live.
The short version
| Cursor | GitHub Copilot | |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | A code editor with AI built in | An AI assistant that works inside other editors |
| Where you work | Its own editor, built on a VS Code foundation | VS Code, JetBrains and other supported editors |
| Free plan | Yes, with limited agent and chat requests | Yes (GitHub lists 2,000 completions a month plus limited chat and agent use) |
| MCP servers | Yes | Yes |
| Standing instructions | .cursor/rules and AGENTS.md | .github/copilot-instructions.md, with AGENTS.md also supported in VS Code |
| Tied to GitHub | No | Yes, with GitHub issues and pull requests |
Plans and prices change often, so check Cursor's pricing page and GitHub's plans page rather than trusting any table, including this one.
How they feel to use
Cursor is an editor you move into. If you already use VS Code, it looks familiar. Its chat and agent are central to the layout rather than a side panel you add later. You'll need to install it and switch your editor, which is a small cost if you're happy to, and a bigger one if your team standardises on something else.
GitHub Copilot is something you add. You keep your current editor, extensions and habits, and Copilot appears as suggestions as you type, plus a Chat view where you can start an agent session. The agent features are most complete in VS Code, and GitHub notes that available features differ from one editor to another, so check yours before committing.
Where Cursor is stronger
- AI-first editing. The whole editor is designed around working with an agent, rather than adding one to an existing design.
- Rules that target files.
.cursor/rulescan apply instructions only to certain files or only when relevant. Our Cursor rules guide shows how. - Simple MCP setup. MCP servers are configured with a simple
mcp.jsonfile. See Add your first MCP server to Cursor.
Where GitHub Copilot is stronger
- No switching. It works in the editor you already use, including JetBrains tools as well as VS Code.
- GitHub integration. It connects with issues and pull requests, which helps if your team already lives on GitHub.
- Beyond the editor. GitHub also offers a coding agent and a command-line tool alongside the editor assistant.
- Easy to try. There's a Free plan, and VS Code's agent has a cautious default of asking before it acts. See Use GitHub Copilot agent mode in VS Code.
What they share
Both support MCP (Model Context Protocol, a standard way to plug extra tools into an AI), so tools like a browser or issue tracker can work with either. Both let you write standing instructions the AI reads automatically, and both let you review changes before you keep them. Neither replaces reading what the AI wrote.
Who should pick what
- You're a student or hobbyist trying AI for the first time: Either free plan works. Pick based on whether you'd rather install a new editor (Cursor) or add an extension to one you have (Copilot).
- Your team uses VS Code or JetBrains and GitHub: Copilot fits with least disruption.
- You want the most AI-centred editing experience: Try Cursor.
- You're not sure: Give each the same task, such as adding a small feature to a project you know well, and see which one you reach for the next day.
They aren't mutually exclusive. Some people use Copilot's suggestions in one project and Cursor in another. If you're also weighing terminal agents, see Claude Code vs Cursor.
Our verdict
If you want AI without changing your tools, start with GitHub Copilot. If you're ready to move to an editor designed around AI, start with Cursor. The free plans make this an easy experiment, so run it on one real task before paying for either.