Cursor vs Zed: what developers actually say
Based on 1,223 opinions on Hacker News from developers who discussed these two, most of them first-hand users.
Zed comes out ahead on approval, 59 versus 55 overall and 57 versus 53 in the last 90 days, and on direct comparisons, where 14 commenters picked Zed and 7 picked Cursor. Its clearest edges are speed (62 positive, 16 negative) and UX (119 positive, 56 negative), while Cursor's reliability is its weak spot (14 positive, 58 negative). Cursor's cost numbers are split (58 positive, 60 negative), and it carries far more discussion, 766 opinions from 600 authors. Pick Cursor when Cursor Tab and one interface for many agents matter more than native speed and lower resource use.
When developers explicitly said they prefer one or switched: 7 picked Cursor, 14 picked Zed.
Choose Cursor if
- Rely on Cursor Tab for completions and refactors
- Want one interface for Claude, Codex and other agents
- Accept higher cost and some reliability risk for that workflow
Choose Zed if
- Want a fast native editor with a strong agent panel
- Care about battery, memory and startup speed
- Prefer ACP so existing Claude Code and Codex CLI subscriptions work
Where each one wins and loses
Why developers switched
Picked Cursor
Picked Zed
Summaries are paraphrased. Each links to the original comment.