
TL;DR
On October 29th, both Cursor and Windsurf dropped their first in-house models on the same day. Composer vs SWE-1.5. Here's what the benchmarks actually show.
Direct answer
On October 29th, both Cursor and Windsurf dropped their first in-house models on the same day. Composer vs SWE-1.5. Here's what the benchmarks actually show.
Best for
Developers comparing real tool tradeoffs before choosing a stack.
Covers
Verdict, tradeoffs, pricing signals, workflow fit, and related alternatives.
Read next
Both fork VS Code and add AI. Windsurf has Cascade. Cursor has Composer 2. Here is how they compare for TypeScript.
5 min readCursor just dropped their first in-house model. Composer is 4x faster than similar models and completes most coding tasks in under 30 seconds. Here's what actually changed and why it matters.
4 min readFrom terminal agents to cloud IDEs - these are the AI coding tools worth using for TypeScript development in 2026.
8 min readOctober 29th, 2025. Cursor drops Composer. Same day, Windsurf releases SWE-1.5. Both claim to be the fastest AI coding model.
Update (March 2026): Since this article was published, OpenAI acquired Windsurf (formerly Codeium). The product continues to operate but is now part of the OpenAI ecosystem. See our pricing comparison for the latest details.
Both say they're the best. Let's look at what the actual data shows.
| Tool | Documentation | Pricing |
|---|---|---|
| Windsurf | Windsurf Docs | Windsurf Pricing |
| Cursor | Cursor Docs | Cursor Pricing |
SWE-1.5 is Windsurf's latest frontier model - a model with hundreds of billions of parameters that achieves near-SOTA (state-of-the-art) coding performance. But here's the kicker: it runs at up to 950 tokens per second.
For broader context, pair this with Cursor vs Claude Code in 2026 - Which Should You Use? and Every AI Coding Tool Compared: The 2026 Matrix; those companion pieces show where this fits in the wider AI developer workflow.
To put that in perspective:
This is achieved through a partnership with Cerebras, an AI inference provider.

When you're coding, waiting 20 seconds for AI to respond breaks your flow. That's the problem both Cursor and Windsurf are solving.
Cursor's Composer: Completes most tasks in under 30 seconds Windsurf's SWE-1.5: Runs at 950 tokens/second
Both models achieve something similar - fast enough to keep you in flow state. The difference is in how they got there and what they optimize for.
SWE-1.5 Training:
Result: Less verbose output, fewer unnecessary try-catch blocks, solutions that follow best practices.
On SWE-Bench Pro (a benchmark of real-world coding tasks), SWE-1.5 achieves near-frontier performance while completing tasks faster than any other model.

The chart shows the trade-off between speed and intelligence - SWE-1.5 is an outlier that achieves both.
Get the weekly deep dive
Tutorials on Claude Code, AI agents, and dev tools - delivered free every week.
From the archive
Nov 2, 2025 • 8 min read
Oct 28, 2025 • 5 min read
Oct 24, 2025 • 7 min read
Oct 21, 2025 • 3 min read
Windsurf's engineers use SWE-1.5 daily for:
Tasks that used to take 20+ seconds now complete in under 5 seconds.
When a model runs 10x faster, everything else becomes a bottleneck. Windsurf rewrote critical components to keep up:
These improvements reduce overhead by up to 2 seconds per step and benefit all models in Windsurf, not just SWE-1.5.
Cursor Composer:
Windsurf SWE-1.5:
The Key Difference:
Cursor optimized for multi-agent workflows and speed. Windsurf optimized for integrated agent experience and throughput.
Both achieve sub-30-second completion times. Both use reinforcement learning. Both trained on real developer workflows.
Choose Cursor Composer if:
Choose Windsurf SWE-1.5 if:
Real talk: Both are excellent. The competition between them is pushing the entire space forward.
October 29th, 2025 marked a shift:
We're past the era of "just use GPT-4 for coding." Custom models trained on real developer workflows, optimized for speed, integrated with purpose-built editors - that's the new standard.
Both Cursor and Windsurf proved it's possible on the same day. And developers are the winners.
Windsurf: https://windsurf.com/download Cursor: https://cursor.com/download
Both models are available now. Test them with your actual workflow and see which one fits better.
SWE-1.5 is Windsurf's in-house coding model optimized for raw throughput (950 tokens per second) with near-SOTA benchmark performance. Cursor Composer is Cursor's agentic orchestration layer that coordinates multiple agents in parallel with features like git worktrees for workspace isolation. SWE-1.5 is a model; Composer is an agent architecture that can use multiple models.
Yes. SWE-1.5 runs at 950 tokens per second, which is approximately 13x faster than Claude Sonnet 4.5 and 6x faster than Claude Haiku 4.5. The speed comes from Windsurf's partnership with Cerebras for inference infrastructure.
Both handle full-stack development well. Cursor's strength is multi-agent parallelization - it can run multiple agents simultaneously with git worktree isolation. Windsurf's strength is throughput and an integrated agent experience through its Cascade agent harness. Choose based on whether you value parallelization (Cursor) or raw speed in a single session (Windsurf).
No. SWE-1.5 is tightly integrated with the Windsurf editor and its Cascade agent harness. Unlike Claude or GPT models, you cannot access SWE-1.5 through a general API. This is similar to how Cursor Composer only runs inside the Cursor editor.
Both have free tiers. Windsurf Pro is $20/month with generous usage limits. Cursor Pro is also $20/month. See the official Windsurf pricing and Cursor pricing for current tier details and usage limits, as these change frequently.
Yes. OpenAI acquired Windsurf (formerly known as Codeium) in early 2026. The product continues to operate as Windsurf but is now part of the OpenAI ecosystem. This may affect future pricing and feature development.
Windsurf has an edge for codebase exploration through its Codemaps feature, which is powered by SWE-1.5's speed. Cursor handles large codebases well through its indexed project understanding, but does not have an equivalent visual mapping feature. For pure code navigation and understanding, both are capable - try each with your actual codebase to see which fits better.
Technical content at the intersection of AI and development. Building with AI agents, Claude Code, and modern dev tools - then showing you exactly how it works.
Codeium's AI-native IDE. Cascade agent mode handles multi-file edits autonomously. Free tier with generous limits. Stron...
View ToolAI-native code editor forked from VS Code. Composer mode rewrites multiple files at once. Tab autocomplete predicts your...
View ToolInteractive TUI dashboard that shows exactly where your Claude Code and Cursor tokens are going, in real time.
View ToolA concrete step-by-step guide to moving your development workflow from Cursor to Claude Code - settings, rules, keybindings, and the habits that transfer.
Getting StartedInstall the dd CLI and scaffold your first AI-powered app in under a minute.
Getting StartedConfigure Claude Code for maximum productivity -- CLAUDE.md, sub-agents, MCP servers, and autonomous workflows.
AI Agents
Both fork VS Code and add AI. Windsurf has Cascade. Cursor has Composer 2. Here is how they compare for TypeScript.

Cursor just dropped their first in-house model. Composer is 4x faster than similar models and completes most coding task...

From terminal agents to cloud IDEs - these are the AI coding tools worth using for TypeScript development in 2026.

12 AI coding tools across 4 architecture types, compared on pricing, strengths, weaknesses, and best use cases. The defi...

From Claude Code to Gladia, the ten CLIs every AI-native developer should know. Install commands, trade-offs, and when t...

A deep analysis of what AI coding tools actually cost when you factor in usage patterns, hidden limits, and real-world w...

New tutorials, open-source projects, and deep dives on coding agents - delivered weekly.