Cursor vs Freebuff

Compare Cursor and Freebuff: free credits, features, and ratings. Which one is right for you?

Feature
Category
Coding Assistant
Coding Assistant
Rating
⭐ 3.5
⭐ 3.5
Free Credits
0 undefined
0 undefined
Refresh Period
one-time
unlimited
Resolution
N/A
N/A
Watermark
No
No
Commercial Use
No
No
Paid From
$20/month
Codebuff from $100/mo

Cursor

AI coding IDE, #1 market share at 31%. Free Hobby plan with no credit card required. Pro at $20/mo supports GPT-4o, Claude and more.

Pros

  • βœ“Largest market share, most community resources
  • βœ“No credit card needed
  • βœ“Strong Agent capabilities
  • βœ“Most models supported

Cons

  • βœ—Free tier limits are vague
  • βœ—$20/mo not cheap
  • βœ—VSCode-based, heavy

Key Features

AI Agent modeTab smart completionCode chatMulti-model (GPT-4o/Claude/Gemini)Cloud AgentsMCPs extensions
View Details β†’

Freebuff

Free AI coding agent that edits code via natural language in terminal. Based on paid Codebuff, ad-supported. Uses DeepSeek V4 Flash by default, supports Kimi K2.6, MiniMax M2.7 and other models.

Pros

  • βœ“Completely free, ads for credits
  • βœ“No config needed, works out of box
  • βœ“Supports multiple domestic models
  • βœ“Built-in code review and browser use
  • βœ“Open source MIT license

Cons

  • βœ—Ads in terminal
  • βœ—DeepSeek V4 Pro trains on data
  • βœ—Not available in all countries
  • βœ—Requires internet, no offline use

Key Features

Natural language coding in terminal9 built-in sub-agentsDeepSeek V4 FlashCode reviewBrowser useDeep thinkingOpen source MIT license
View Details β†’