AI coding assistants are popping up everywhere, and a tool called Cursor is definitely one of the names you hear a lot. It’s an AI-native code editor that’s designed from the ground up to make developers more productive. But lately, the buzz around Cursor hasn’t just been about its cool features; it’s been about the price tag.
If you’ve spent any time on Reddit recently, you’ve probably stumbled upon the threads. Developers are feeling blindsided by sudden pricing changes, trying to make sense of confusing credit systems, and getting hit with bills they didn’t see coming. It’s a classic story: a great product causing a lot of headaches with a confusing pricing model.
That’s exactly why we’re here. We’re going to sort through the confusion and give you a clear, no-nonsense guide to the current Cursor pricing model. We’ll break down each plan, explain why they switched to usage-based billing, and help you decide if it’s the right tool for you or your team.
What is Cursor and what drives Cursor pricing?
Cursor isn’t just another plugin you add to your existing editor. It’s a complete, AI-first code editor that aims to be a genuine partner in your coding process, not just a fancy autocomplete tool.
But that kind of deep integration has a cost, and it’s mainly driven by the powerful (and expensive) large language models (LLMs) it relies on from companies like OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google. Every time you ask Cursor to write, refactor, or explain code, it’s making an API call to one of these models, and that costs money. The features that have the biggest impact on your bill are:
-
Agent: This is Cursor’s big-ticket feature. It’s what you use for complex, multi-file tasks. When you ask it to refactor a huge chunk of your application, it’s using a serious amount of computing power.
-
Tab: This is the "magically accurate autocomplete" that’s always running in the background, trying to guess what you’re going to type next.
-
Model Selection: Cursor lets you choose which AI model you want to use, but they’re not all created equal when it comes to price. High-end models like GPT-4o or Claude 3 Opus cost a lot more per use than the standard options.
-
Context Window: This is how much code and information the AI can look at a single time. Giving the AI more context (like pointing it to several large files) makes its suggestions smarter, but it also makes the request more expensive to process.
The big Cursor pricing shift: From predictable requests to usage-based credits
The real reason for all the recent chatter was Cursor’s decision to ditch its simple, predictable pricing for a much more complicated, usage-based model. Let’s look at what actually changed.
The old Cursor pricing model (pre-June 2025)
Before the change, Cursor’s Pro plan was beautifully simple: $20 a month got you 500 "fast requests." Some of the more advanced models might have cost two requests instead of one, but you always knew where you stood. You had a hard limit. Once you hit it, your requests would get slower, but you would never, ever get a surprise bill. It was predictable, which is something every developer and business relies on for budgeting.
The new Cursor pricing model (post-June 2025)
The new model threw that out the window and brought in a usage-credit system. Now, that same $20 Pro plan gives you a $20 "pool" of credits. Every time you use a premium AI model, the cost is subtracted from that pool, based on the model’s actual API price.
According to a blog post from Cursor, they made this change to better match the price with the actual cost of running the AI. A simple one-line completion is cheap, while a complex refactoring job across multiple files is way more expensive. That logic makes sense from a business standpoint, but it basically shifted all the financial risk and guesswork over to the user.
Here’s a simple comparison of the two models:
| Feature | Old Pro Plan (Pre-June 2025) | New Pro Plan (Current) |
|---|---|---|
| Billing Basis | Request-based limit | Usage-based credit pool |
| Monthly Limit | 500 "fast requests" | $20 worth of model usage |
| Predictability | High (you knew your max cost) | Low (usage depends on task complexity) |
| "Unlimited" Usage | "Slow requests" after the limit | Unlimited use of the "Auto" model only |
| Risk of Overages | None (the service just got slower) | High (if you enable overages) |
A complete breakdown of Cursor pricing plans in 2025
To make the right call, you need to see all the options on the table. Here’s a full rundown of every Cursor pricing plan, based on their official pricing page.
Individual Cursor pricing plans
-
Hobby: This one’s free. It gives you a limited number of Agent requests and Tab completions. It’s a great way to kick the tires and see if you like the editor before pulling out your wallet.
-
Pro: At $20 per month, this is their main offering. It includes unlimited Tab completions, more Agent requests, and that $20 monthly credit pool for using premium models.
-
Pro+: For $60 per month, this plan is aimed at power users. You get everything in the Pro plan, but with three times the usage credits ($60 worth).
-
Ultra: This is the top tier for individuals, at $200 per month. It’s for the heaviest of users, offering 20 times the usage of the Pro plan and priority access to new features.
Business Cursor pricing plans
-
Teams: This plan costs $40 per user, per month. It comes with all the Pro features, plus the stuff teams need like centralized billing, SSO, and admin controls to manage users.
-
Enterprise: You’ll need to contact them for custom pricing here. This includes everything in the Teams plan, but adds pooled usage for your whole organization, invoice billing, and dedicated support.
Key Cursor pricing factors that drain your usage credits faster
With this new credit system, you have to remember that not all actions are priced the same. Certain workflows can burn through that $20 credit pool a lot faster than you’d think.
-
Using non-auto models: If you decide to manually pick a premium model like Claude 3 Opus for your tasks, your usage is billed directly against its public API rate. These models are incredibly smart, but they come with a premium price tag.
-
Turning on "max mode": This feature gives the AI a much bigger context window, which allows it to reason through more complex problems. It’s super helpful for tricky bugs, but it’s also a lot more expensive. Just a handful of queries in Max Mode could potentially wipe out your entire monthly credit allowance.
-
Working in large codebases: The more context you feed the AI, the more it costs. When you use the "@" symbol to pull multiple large files into your prompt, you’re increasing the amount of data being processed, which drives up the cost of that single query.
The hidden costs: Why unpredictable pricing is a problem
The pushback against Cursor’s pricing change wasn’t just about the cost itself, it was about the sudden loss of predictability. For professional developers and businesses, knowing what your software expenses will be each month is essential. A tool that feels like a slot machine, where costs can unexpectedly balloon, is a tough pill to swallow. This model basically turns a developer tool into another piece of cloud infrastructure, like an AWS service, that you have to constantly monitor to avoid a nasty bill at the end of the month.
While some developer tools are moving in this direction, other AI platforms are focused on keeping things simple and predictable. For instance, eesel AI is built for teams that want powerful AI without the financial guesswork. Our plans are based on features and overall capacity, with no per-resolution fees.
This screenshot of eesel AI's pricing page highlights its predictable, flat-rate plans.With eesel AI, you get a whole platform of AI support tools for one flat, predictable monthly price. You’ll never be surprised by a high bill after a month with a lot of support tickets. This straightforward approach lets you grow your support operations with confidence, knowing your costs won’t get out of hand. Plus, getting started is incredibly simple, you can be up and running in minutes, not months, without ever having to talk to a salesperson.
This video provides a detailed explanation of the recent changes and confusion surrounding the Cursor pricing model.
Cursor pricing: Balancing power with predictability
There’s no doubt that Cursor is a powerful, slick AI code editor that can give a developer’s productivity a real boost. However, its pricing model has become complex and, for many people, unpredictable.
For a solo developer, the Pro plan can still be a great deal, especially if you’re careful about your usage and stick mostly to the unlimited "Auto" model.
But for teams and businesses, the variable costs are a major budgeting headache. The real cost of the tool is no longer the flat monthly fee, but the total monthly usage, which is almost impossible to forecast accurately. The best AI tools aren’t just about having the most advanced features; they’re about being a reliable partner you can count on. And a transparent, predictable pricing model is a huge part of building that trust.
Your next move: Choose predictable AI power
If you’re looking for powerful AI automation without the billing anxiety, check out eesel AI’s transparent pricing. See how our all-in-one platform can improve your customer support with costs you can actually predict.
Start your free trial today and see for yourself how easy it is to get going.
Frequently asked questions
Cursor switched to a usage-based credit system to better align the cost of its service with the actual expense of running the underlying large language models (LLMs). This means simple actions are cheaper, while complex AI tasks using powerful models incur higher costs.
To manage your Cursor pricing effectively, it’s crucial to be mindful of your AI usage. Prioritize the "Auto" model, avoid "max mode" unless absolutely necessary, and be cautious when providing extensive context (e.g., multiple large files) to the AI, as these actions consume credits faster.
The free Hobby plan for Cursor pricing provides a limited number of Agent requests and Tab completions. It’s primarily designed to allow users to explore the editor’s basic AI capabilities and assess its fit for their workflow before considering a paid subscription.
Your Cursor pricing credits can deplete quickly by opting for non-"Auto" premium AI models (like Claude 3 Opus), enabling "max mode" for an expanded context window, and working within large codebases that require feeding many files into AI prompts.
For solo developers, the Pro plan (at $20/month) is often sufficient if AI usage is managed carefully. For small teams, the Teams plan ($40 per user/month) is generally more suitable, as it includes essential features like centralized billing, SSO, and administrative controls for user management.
The "Auto" model typically offers unlimited usage for certain features once your monthly credit pool is depleted, making it a more predictable option for Cursor pricing. In contrast, manually selecting premium models, such as GPT-4o or Claude 3 Opus, bills directly against their higher per-use API rates and will consume your credits much faster.
