Which is better for teams: Cursor or Devin?

Choose Cursor for broad developer rollout; choose Devin for narrower high-value execution workflows.

Which tool has a free tier?

Cursor still has a free tier. Devin is mainly a paid decision once you need consistent usage or team controls.

Which tool starts cheaper?

Cursor and Devin start at the same published paid price: $20/month before usage or team add-ons change the story.

Can I use Cursor and Devin together?

Yes. A split-seat setup makes sense when one tool covers the default workflow and the other handles the narrower job it clearly does better.

Which is easier to standardize across a company?

Choose Cursor for standard engineering seats; choose Devin for specialist autonomous execution pockets.

How much does Cursor cost?

Cursor has paid plans starting at $20/month, and a free tier is also available.

How much does Devin cost?

Devin has paid plans starting at $20/month.

Which tool is cheaper for team rollout?

Cursor is currently cheaper for a small team based on the best published monthly plan, with a gap of $0/month at the default five-seat lens.

Editorial compare

Cursor vs Devin

Cursor is the better default buy for developer productivity inside an IDE. Devin is the better specialist buy when the company wants autonomous engineering execution on tickets, migrations, and backlog work rather than just a smarter coding seat.

Updated because: Cursor keeps deepening the team-ready editor path, while Devin keeps sharpening the autonomous engineering story. The split is no longer just coding quality; it is human-in-the-loop seat versus autonomous execution layer.

A wins when

Cursor

Cursor is the clearest choice when the buying decision is specifically about developer throughput inside an IDE, not about a broader company-wide assistant.

Starts at: $20 /mo
Best for: Coding • 10/10
Watchout: Weak fit for writing, meetings, and general knowledge work outside engineering.

Official pricing

B wins when

Devin

Devin is easiest to justify when the buyer wants autonomous engineering execution on tickets, migrations, and backlog work rather than a cheaper assistant that still requires the human to do nearly all of the work.

Starts at: $20 /mo
Best for: Automation • 9/10
Watchout: It is not a cheap default coding seat for every developer.

Official pricing

Last verified: Mar 28, 2026Cursor site Cursor pricing Devin site Devin pricing Methodology

Individual lens

If you are buying a single seat

This callout compresses the comparison for personal subscribers before the team and enterprise layers complicate the answer.

Choose Cursor for the default coding seat. Choose Devin only if autonomous engineering output is the thing you are really buying.

Some links on AgentHub may be affiliate or partner links. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. Learn more

Adjust seat count

Move the seat count to see how the cost gap changes as rollout size grows.

Pricing lens

Seat-cost pressure at your current team size

Published pricing is directional only, but it still helps expose when a close comparison is not really close. 5 seats

Cursor

$100

Best published monthly estimate

Best published plan: Pro

Devin

$100

Best published monthly estimate

Best published plan: Core

Cursor is cheaper per month by $0.

Feature matrix

Where the products differ in practice

This matrix keeps the comparison grounded in buyer-relevant differences rather than generic feature checkmarks.

role

Primary product role

Cursor leans Developer seat inside an IDE, while Devin leans Autonomous engineering execution layer.

Cursor

Developer seat inside an IDE

Devin

Autonomous engineering execution layer

pricing

Published team economics

Cursor leans $20 Pro and $40 Teams per user monthly, while Devin leans $20 Core entry, then $500 Team for autonomous engineering workflow.

Cursor

$20 Pro and $40 Teams per user monthly

Devin

$20 Core entry, then $500 Team for autonomous engineering workflow

best-fit

What you are really buying

Cursor leans Faster human coding flow inside the editor, while Devin leans Autonomous completion of selected engineering work.

Cursor

These verdicts compress the long-form editorial read into segment-specific decisions.

Individual

Choose Cursor for the default coding seat. Choose Devin only if autonomous engineering output is the thing you are really buying.

Team

Choose Cursor for daily developer throughput. Choose Devin for narrower backlog-execution and agentic engineering workflows.

Enterprise

Enterprise buyers should treat this as standard coding seat versus specialist autonomous engineering layer.

Recent delta

What changed since the last meaningful update

Cursor keeps deepening the team-ready editor path, while Devin keeps sharpening the autonomous engineering story. The split is no longer just coding quality; it is human-in-the-loop seat versus autonomous execution layer.

Decision actions

Check the two most realistic next moves

Use the current vendor offer when one side is already favored, or move to alternatives if neither side clears the bar.

Cursor

coding-assistant

Official pricing

Devin

engineering-agent

Official pricing

If neither side really fits, compare narrower alternatives before funding the wrong seat.

View alternatives: Cursor

FAQ

The long-tail questions buyers ask before they pick a side

These answers stay visible on-page so the comparison can serve both direct readers and search-driven visitors.

Choose Cursor for the everyday coding seat; choose Devin only for autonomous engineering value.

Keep comparing

Continue from this shortlist without going back to the index

These links keep the decision path moving across adjacent compare and best-list pages.

Cursor

Cursor Read pricing guide

The $20 Pro tier is the real entry point, but the business conversation usually starts at Teams once admin controls and shared workflows matter.

Cursor

Cursor Read alternatives guide

The best Cursor alternative depends on why the team is hesitating: GitHub Copilot for safer rollout economics, Windsurf for another agent-forward editor, Replit for a broader build-and-run environment.

Use cases

Best AI tools for enterprise backlog automation

For engineering leaders deciding whether AI should merely assist on tickets or actually own chunks of migrations, refactors, and repetitive engineering work.

Changes

This list is for buyers choosing AI coding assistants, not for people looking for a universal AI winner. It weighs IDE depth, coding throughput, seat cost, and whether the same purchase must also help with research and writing outside engineering together so the top pick still makes sense in a real budget conversation.