Quick Verdict
The Short Answer
- Choose Codex if: You prefer terminal workflows, need autonomous cloud sandbox execution, want an open-source CLI, or run parallelizable tasks that don't need babysitting. The Codex macOS app turns multi-agent work into a visual command center.
- Choose Cursor if: You want a polished IDE with sub-200ms tab completions, up to 8 parallel agents, background agents in cloud VMs, and a mature community ecosystem of rules and templates.
- The real pattern: Power users run both. Cursor handles the 80% of work that involves active coding, iteration, and exploration. Codex handles the 20% involving parallelizable tasks, automated workflows, and background processing.
These tools represent two fundamentally different paradigms. Codex is an agent you talk to in your terminal. Cursor is an IDE you code inside. One runs tasks autonomously in cloud sandboxes while you do something else. The other wraps every editing action in AI assistance while you type. The right choice depends on whether you think of AI as a coworker who handles tasks independently or a copilot who accelerates your own editing.
Two Paradigms: Terminal Agent vs. AI IDE
The architectural difference between Codex and Cursor is not cosmetic. It shapes everything: how you interact with the tool, what tasks it handles well, and where it breaks down.
Codex: Terminal-First Agent
Codex CLI runs in your terminal, reads your codebase, and makes changes locally. The Codex macOS app adds a visual layer for managing multiple cloud sandbox agents. Each task gets its own isolated environment preloaded with your repo. OS-level sandboxing (macOS seatbelt, Linux Landlock) enforces security. Open source, built in Rust, supports MCP for tool extensibility.
Cursor: AI-Native IDE
Cursor is a VS Code fork with AI integrated into every surface. Tab completions under 200ms. Inline diffs. A Composer agent that finishes most tasks in under 30 seconds. Background Agents run in cloud-hosted Ubuntu VMs. Up to 8 parallel agents in isolated Git worktrees. The community ecosystem at cursor.directory has thousands of rules and templates.
| Dimension | Codex | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| Interface | Terminal CLI + macOS desktop app | VS Code fork (standalone IDE) |
| Execution environment | Local + cloud sandboxes per task | Local + cloud VMs for background agents |
| Underlying model | GPT-5.3-Codex (purpose-built) | Claude, GPT, Gemini, xAI, Cursor models |
| Open source | Yes (Apache 2.0, Rust) | No (closed-source VS Code fork) |
| IDE extension | VS Code / Cursor extension available | Is the IDE |
| OS support | macOS, Linux (Windows preview) | macOS, Windows, Linux |
| MCP support | Yes (tool extensibility) | Yes (client support) |
The practical impact: Codex can run headless in CI/CD pipelines, automate repo-level tasks via scripting, and operate without a GUI. Cursor cannot. Cursor can show you inline diffs, provide instant tab completions, and let you visually review AI changes within a familiar editor. Codex cannot. They are complementary, not interchangeable.
Head-to-Head Feature Comparison
Here is how Codex and Cursor compare across the features that matter most, tested February 2026.
| Feature | Codex | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| Tab completions | Not a primary feature | Sub-200ms, fastest in market |
| Inline code editing | Terminal-based diffs | Visual inline diffs in editor |
| Autonomous task execution | Up to 30 min per cloud task | Background agents in cloud VMs |
| Multi-agent parallelism | Multiple cloud sandbox tasks | Up to 8 agents in worktrees |
| Code review | Built-in agent code review | Not built-in |
| Web search | Built-in, enabled by default | Not built-in |
| Multimodal input | Text, screenshots, diagrams | Text, images via chat |
| Deployment integrations | Vercel, Cloudflare, Netlify, Render | Not built-in |
| Voice input | Not available | Voice mode for hands-free coding |
| Subagents | Multi-agent collaboration (experimental) | Subagents with nested spawning (v2.5) |
| Community ecosystem | Growing (Skills library) | Mature (cursor.directory, thousands of rules) |
| CI/CD integration | Scriptable via exec command | Not available (IDE-only) |
The pattern is clear. Codex leads on autonomy: cloud sandboxes, web search, code review, deployment integrations, and CI/CD scripting. Cursor leads on interactivity: tab completions, inline diffs, subagents, voice mode, and community ecosystem. These are not overlapping strengths.
Agent Capabilities: Cloud Sandbox vs. Background Agents
Both tools now support multi-agent workflows, but the execution model is different in ways that matter for daily use.
Codex: Cloud Sandbox Per Task
Each task runs in its own cloud sandbox preloaded with your repository. The agent can read files, write code, run tests, and iterate for up to 30 minutes without human input. Three approval modes let you control how hands-on you want to be. The Codex macOS app provides a visual dashboard for managing multiple sandbox tasks simultaneously.
Cursor: Parallel Agents in Worktrees
Cursor runs up to 8 agents in parallel, each in isolated Git worktrees or cloud-hosted Ubuntu VMs. Background agents continue working while you do something else, producing merge-ready PRs with artifacts like videos, screenshots, and logs. Subagents in v2.5 can spawn nested subagents and execute asynchronously.
| Dimension | Codex | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| Isolation model | Cloud sandbox per task | Git worktrees or cloud VMs |
| Max parallel agents | Multiple (no published limit) | 8 per session |
| Max task duration | 30 minutes autonomous | No published time limit |
| Approval workflow | 3 modes: suggest, auto-edit, on-request | Approve/reject per change |
| Output format | Diffs applied to repo | PRs with videos, screenshots, logs |
| Self-testing | Runs tests in sandbox | Runs tests + browser tool |
| Figma integration | Yes (published Skill) | Not built-in |
When Agent Architecture Matters
If you assign 5 independent bug fixes and want them done in parallel while you focus on architecture, Codex's cloud sandbox model is purpose-built for that workflow. If you want to run an agent on a feature branch while you manually code on another, Cursor's background agents in isolated worktrees keep everything clean. The right choice depends on whether you want to delegate and walk away (Codex) or delegate and keep coding (Cursor).
Pricing Comparison
Both tools share the same $20 entry point, but the pricing structures diverge at higher tiers. Codex pricing is bundled with ChatGPT subscriptions. Cursor has its own standalone tiers.
| Tier | Codex (via ChatGPT) | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Codex included in ChatGPT Free (limited time) | 50 premium requests, 500 free model requests |
| $20/month | Plus: CLI + app, usage-limited | Pro: unlimited tabs, extended agent, background agents |
| $60/month | Not available at this tier | Pro+: 3x usage of premium models |
| $200/month | Pro: 300-1,500 messages per 5 hours | Ultra: 20x usage, priority features |
| Teams | Business ($25/user) or Enterprise | $40/user/month with SSO |
| API pricing | codex-mini: $1.50/$6.00 per M tokens | Credit-based billing since June 2025 |
| Overage | Rate-limited at cap | Slowdowns at limit, $0.04/premium request |
The Real Cost Difference
At $20/month, both tools deliver solid value. The divergence starts with how you hit limits. Codex users on Plus get 30-150 messages per 5 hours, and cloud sandbox tasks consume those messages quickly. Cursor Pro users get extended agent requests but face soft limits that are intentionally opaque. Heavy users of either tool will spend $200/month. The question is whether you prefer Codex's clear message-based limits or Cursor's flexible but unpredictable credit system.
Developer Experience: Terminal vs. IDE
The daily experience of using these tools is fundamentally different. This is not a feature checkbox. It is about how you think while coding.
Codex: Describe and Delegate
You describe a task in plain language. Codex reads your codebase, proposes changes, and can execute them autonomously in a sandbox. You review the output after the fact. The mental model is closer to managing a junior developer: give clear instructions, review the PR. Best for developers who think in terms of tasks, not keystrokes.
Cursor: Code with AI Inline
You write code with AI completing your thoughts in real time. Highlight a block, describe a change, see an inline diff instantly. The mental model is closer to pair programming: you and the AI work on the same file simultaneously. Best for developers who think in terms of edits, not tasks.
Codex CLI: Task-Based Workflow
$ codex "Add input validation to the signup form.
Reject emails without @ symbol, passwords under 8 chars.
Add error messages below each field."
# Codex reads your codebase, finds relevant files,
# makes changes across components, and runs tests.
# You review the diff when it's done.Developer sentiment from community discussions follows a consistent pattern. Codex users praise its follow-through on multi-step tasks: understanding repo structure, making coordinated changes, running tests, and iterating without drifting. Cursor users praise its responsiveness: sub-200ms completions, instant inline diffs, and the feeling of AI accelerating every keystroke.
The developers getting the most from AI in 2026 are not picking sides. They use Cursor for active coding sessions where speed and interactivity matter. They use Codex for background tasks, automated workflows, and anything they can describe and delegate. See our Codex vs Claude Code comparison for how Codex stacks up against another terminal agent.
When Codex Wins
Autonomous Background Tasks
Codex cloud sandboxes run for up to 30 minutes without human input. Write 5 task descriptions, launch them in parallel, and review the results. Cursor's background agents serve a similar purpose but require an IDE to manage. Codex's macOS app provides a dedicated interface for this workflow.
CI/CD and Scripting
Codex CLI's exec command lets you script AI-powered workflows. Run Codex in a GitHub Action to auto-fix failing tests, generate migration code, or update dependencies. Cursor is IDE-only and cannot be automated in a pipeline.
Open Source and Extensibility
Codex CLI is Apache 2.0 with a Rust codebase. You can fork it, contribute, inspect the code, and extend it via MCP. The Skills library provides published integrations for Figma, Linear, Vercel, and more. Cursor is closed source.
Deterministic Multi-Step Tasks
Developers report that Codex is more deterministic on multi-step tasks: it understands repo structure, makes coordinated changes, runs tests, and iterates without drifting. The GPT-5.3-Codex model is purpose-built for coding tasks, not a general-purpose model adapted for code.
When Cursor Wins
Real-Time Interactive Coding
Sub-200ms tab completions. Instant inline diffs. A Composer model that finishes agentic tasks in under 30 seconds. If you want AI that accelerates every keystroke while you code, Cursor is the fastest tool shipping today.
Visual Code Review and Diffs
Cursor shows you every AI change as a visual diff inside your editor. You see exactly what changed, accept or reject line by line, and iterate in place. Codex operates in the terminal, where reviewing multi-file diffs requires more effort.
Model Flexibility
Cursor supports OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, xAI, and its own custom models. You can switch models mid-conversation. Codex is locked to OpenAI's GPT-5.3-Codex and codex-mini models. If you need Claude for reasoning-heavy tasks or Gemini for long context, Cursor gives you that flexibility.
Community and Ecosystem
With 360K+ paying subscribers, cursor.directory has thousands of community-contributed rules, templates, and configurations. Voice mode, Arena mode for model comparison, and a mature extension ecosystem make Cursor the most polished AI IDE in the market.
The common thread: Cursor wins when you are actively coding and want AI embedded in every action. Codex wins when you have tasks to delegate and want them done autonomously. For a comparison with another AI IDE, see our Windsurf vs Cursor breakdown.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Codex or Cursor better for coding in 2026?
They serve different workflows. Codex is a terminal-first agent for autonomous, parallelizable tasks in cloud sandboxes. Cursor is an AI-native IDE for real-time interactive coding with sub-200ms tab completions and up to 8 parallel agents. Most power users run both: Cursor for the 80% of active coding, Codex for the 20% of delegatable tasks.
How much does Codex cost compared to Cursor?
Both start at $20/month. ChatGPT Plus includes Codex CLI and the macOS app with usage limits. Cursor Pro includes unlimited tab completions and extended agent access. At the $200 tier, ChatGPT Pro gives 300-1,500 messages per 5 hours, while Cursor Ultra provides 20x usage. For a limited time, Codex is included in ChatGPT Free.
Can I use Codex inside Cursor?
Yes. OpenAI released a Codex IDE extension that works inside VS Code, Cursor, and other VS Code forks. You get Codex's agent capabilities with shorter prompts and IDE context like open files and selected code.
Is Codex CLI open source?
Yes. Codex CLI is open source under Apache 2.0, built in Rust. The underlying GPT-5.3-Codex model and cloud sandbox infrastructure are proprietary. Cursor is fully closed source.
What is the Codex macOS app?
Launched February 2, 2026, the Codex app is a desktop application for managing multiple AI coding agents. Each task runs in its own cloud sandbox preloaded with your repo. Tasks run autonomously for up to 30 minutes. It integrates with Figma, Linear, Vercel, Cloudflare, and more through published Skills. Currently macOS only.
Does Cursor have a terminal agent like Codex?
No. Cursor is IDE-only with no standalone CLI agent. For terminal-based coding, developers pair Cursor with a separate CLI tool. See our comparisons of Cline vs Claude Code and Aider vs Cursor for terminal-friendly alternatives.
Terminal Agents Need Fast Apply
Morph's Fast Apply model generates file edits 10x faster than search-and-replace. Works with Codex, Cursor, or any AI coding tool.