MCP.directory
Updated May 2026Comparison22 min read

Cursor Tab vs Copilot vs Codeium vs Tabnine vs Cody: 2026 Comparison

Five AI autocomplete tools, one keystroke: Tab. The differences are pricing, where the model runs, what it predicts (next character, next line, next edit, or next jump), and how much of your codebase it sees. We pulled every fact below from each vendor’s own pricing or product pages — no fabricated benchmarks, no review-aggregator noise.

Editorial illustration: five luminous keystroke glyphs (Cursor Tab cursor, GitHub octocat tab, Codeium wave, Tabnine T, Sourcegraph C) floating above a midnight code editor, connected by a faint cyan trail of completion suggestions.
On this page · 14 sections▾
  1. TL;DR + decision tree
  2. What inline AI autocomplete is
  3. Side-by-side matrix
  4. Cursor Tab — predictive next-edit
  5. GitHub Copilot — corporate standard
  6. Codeium / Windsurf — free option
  7. Tabnine — privacy / on-prem
  8. Sourcegraph Cody — code-graph context
  9. Performance considerations
  10. Pricing matrix
  11. Common pitfalls
  12. Community signal
  13. FAQ
  14. Sources

TL;DR + decision tree

  • If you already live in Cursor — Tab is the best-in-class autocomplete and it’s included on the free Hobby plan. Your decision is “do I upgrade to Pro for unlimited frontier-model chat?”, not “which autocomplete?”
  • If your team mandates GitHub Copilot — the Pro plan at $10/seat/month is the cheapest way to get inline AI in VS Code with corporate compliance, audit logging, and SSO. “Mature, integrated, boring” is the right brief.
  • If you need on-prem or air-gapped — Tabnine. The verbatim pitch on tabnine.com is “Deploy anywhere — SaaS, on-prem, or fully air-gapped — and keep everything inside.” Nobody else here ships that for individual developers.
  • If you live across many repos in a monorepo — Sourcegraph Cody, but only if your org has Sourcegraph Enterprise (the 2026 pricing page shows Enterprise “Starting at $16K”). The code-graph advantage is real, but the entry price is now firmly enterprise-only.
  • If you want the best free option — Codeium (now Windsurf-branded). The Free tier on windsurf.com is $0/month with a daily/weekly Standard allowance and the broadest free IDE support of the five tools here.

We’ll cover each tool in detail below — feature matrix first, then per-tool walkthrough with the vendor’s own language, pricing matrix with cited numbers, and the pitfalls each one ships with.

What inline AI autocomplete is (and what it isn’t)

The category in this post is inline AI autocomplete: the ghost-text suggestion that appears as you type, accepted by pressing Tab. It’s distinct from chat coding (a sidebar where you ask the model to write or refactor code) and from agent / coder modes (where the AI takes multi-step actions across files). All five products in this comparison ship one or both of those adjacent surfaces too, but the Tab keystroke is the differentiator.

Three things matter for inline completion that don’t matter for chat:

  1. Latency. A chat answer can take 5 seconds and feel fine. An inline suggestion that takes 800 ms after you stopped typing is unusable — you’ve already moved on. The good models are sub-200ms p50.
  2. Suggestion shape. Single-character? Single-line? Multi-line block? Predicted next edit somewhere else in the file? Cursor’s Tab predicts cross-file edits and jump targets — Copilot historically predicted the line under the cursor, though both have converged.
  3. Acceptance discipline. An autocomplete that suggests too aggressively becomes noise. The good models suppress when they’re uncertain and only fire when their confidence is above a threshold.

If you’re comparing the agent / chat surfaces of these same products, our Cursor vs Windsurf vs Antigravity vs Kiro piece covers the IDE-agent layer, and Goose vs Cline vs Aider vs Claude Code vs OpenCode (placeholder — post in progress) covers the CLI agents. This post is just about the keystroke.

Side-by-side matrix

Every cell below is sourced from the vendor’s own product, pricing, or docs page (citations in the per-tool sections that follow). Snapshot date: 2026-05-08.

DimensionCursor TabCopilotCodeium / WindsurfTabnineCody
VendorAnysphereGitHub / MicrosoftCodeium → WindsurfTabnine Ltd.Sourcegraph
Free tier✅ Hobby ($0)✅ Free ($0, capped)✅ Free ($0)❌ No free tier❌ Enterprise only
Entry paid$20/mo (Pro)$10/seat/mo$20/mo (Pro)$39/user/moCustom (Enterprise)
Top tier$200/mo (Ultra)$39/seat/mo (Pro+)$200/mo (Max)$59/user/mo (Agentic)$16K+ /yr
IDEsCursor onlyVS Code, JetBrains, Visual Studio, Vim/Neovim, GitHub.comVS Code, JetBrains + own IDEVS Code, JetBrains, moreVS Code, JetBrains, others
On-prem / air-gapped❌ Cloud only❌ Cloud only (GHE.com hosted)Hybrid (Enterprise tier)✅ SaaS / on-prem / air-gapped✅ Self-host (Enterprise)
Special featurePredicts next action / jumpFrontier-model chat + agent (Pro+)Generous free tier, broad IDEAir-gapped deploymentCode-graph context
Best forCursor users, individualsVS Code teams w/ corporate procurementFree / cost-sensitive devsRegulated industries, on-prem mandatesLarge monorepos, enterprise platforms

Three takeaways from the matrix. Cody’s entry price has moved up — as of 2026, Sourcegraph’s public pricing page only displays an Enterprise tier “Starting at $16K,” which effectively removes Cody from the individual-developer consideration set. Tabnine is the only one with a real on-prem story for individuals — Sourcegraph self-hosts but only at the Enterprise tier. Cursor Tab is locked to Cursor; if you won’t leave VS Code, you can’t use it.

Cursor Tab — what makes it different

What it does best

Cursor Tab predicts the next edit, not the next token. The vendor calls it a “specialized Tab model [that] predicts your next action with striking speed and precision” on cursor.com/features. In practice that means the ghost text spans multiple lines, jumps to a different region of the file when the next logical change isn’t on the line under your cursor, and rides on a small purpose-built model rather than a frontier chat model rerouted to inline use.

Pick this if you...

  • Already use Cursor as your daily IDE (or are willing to switch — it’s a VS Code fork, so extensions and keybindings carry over).
  • Want autocomplete that anticipates the cross-file edit, not just the line under the cursor.
  • Care about the IDE’s MCP integration — every server on this directory has a one-click Cursor install card and the ~/.cursor/mcp.json path is documented at /clients/cursor.
  • Want a no-credit-card free tier — the Hobby plan includes Tab completions and limited Agent requests at $0.

Where it shines: refactoring across a file

Rename a function signature in a TypeScript module and the next Tab press jumps you 40 lines down to the call site Cursor knows is now broken — and the suggestion already reflects the new arity. Pair Tab with Cursor’s Composer / Agent and the loop is: Composer generates a multi-file change, you scrub through the diff, and Tab cleans up the residual touch-ups Composer didn’t catch. That “next action” framing is what power-user threads on r/cursor describe as “Tab predicts what I was about to do.”

Skip it if...

Your org standardizes on stock VS Code, JetBrains, or Visual Studio and won’t allow a fork. Cursor Tab is locked to the Cursor IDE — there is no extension you can bolt onto another editor, so an editor switch is a prerequisite.

Source / try it: cursor.com/features

GitHub Copilot — what makes it different

What it does best

Copilot is the AI tool your security team has already approved. It ships in stock VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, Visual Studio, Neovim, and on github.com itself, with audit logging, SSO, and SOC-2 paths trodden by every Fortune 500. If GitHub Enterprise is in your stack, Copilot rides in on the same procurement contract — you don’t re-litigate the AI policy. Five years of shipping inline completions (since 2021) means the model has the most production telemetry of anything in this comparison.

Pick this if you...

  • Work inside a regulated enterprise where new vendor onboarding takes a quarter.
  • Need the cheapest paid inline-AI seat — Pro is $10/user/month, the lowest commercial tier in this comparison.
  • Want to evaluate before paying — the Free tier’s 50 chats and 2,000 completions per month is enough to test on real work.
  • Live in stock VS Code, JetBrains, or Visual Studio and can’t change editors.

Where it shines: the boring corporate default

A 5,000-engineer org rolls out AI assistance: legal reviews the existing GitHub Enterprise data-handling agreement, infosec confirms the same SSO already powers Copilot, and procurement adds a line item to the existing Microsoft contract. Total integration time: a sprint, not a quarter. The completion quality is no longer best-in-class — power users on r/ChatGPTCoding consistently report higher acceptance rates on Cursor Tab and Codeium — but Copilot’s win is friction-free rollout, not subjective preference.

Skip it if...

You’re a solo developer paying out of pocket and want the strongest autocomplete model for the money. Cursor Tab’s next-edit prediction beats Copilot subjectively, and the long-standing “ghosting” issue (suggestion vanishing mid-type) still surfaces in community threads despite improvements. Pro+ at $39/seat is also a hard sell when Cursor charges $20 for comparable frontier-model access.

Source / try it: github.com/features/copilot/plans

Codeium / Windsurf — what makes it different

What it does best

The most generous free tier in the category, and the only one that runs in stock VS Code or JetBrains without paying or switching IDEs. As of mid-2025 codeium.com 301-redirects to windsurf.com — the company merged the standalone extension brand into the Windsurf IDE brand — but the Free tier survived the rebrand at $0/month with a Standard allowance that refreshes daily and weekly.

Pick this if you...

  • Are an indie developer, student, or hobbyist who won’t pay for autocomplete.
  • Want broad IDE support without committing to a new editor — the extension lives in VS Code, JetBrains, and elsewhere.
  • Care more about p50 latency than peak completion quality — the small fast model is competitive on time-to-first-suggestion.
  • Are willing to graduate to the Windsurf IDE itself when you outgrow the extension.

Where it shines: a side project on a Saturday

You’re prototyping a Next.js app on a personal laptop, no employer budget behind you, no expense report. Install the Windsurf extension into VS Code, sign in with GitHub, and you have inline completions within sixty seconds at $0. The pattern recurs in budget-conscious developer threads: “I used Codeium free for two years before paying anyone.” The Standard allowance on the Free tier is fuzzy by design — you’ll discover the cap by hitting it on a long coding session, not by reading the pricing page.

Skip it if...

You’re deploying to a team and need clear “commercial-safe” semantics — the Free tier’s individual-use language has historically excluded organizations above a headcount threshold, so Pro ($20/month) or Teams ($40/user/month) is the unambiguous path. Brand confusion is also real: older comparison articles reference “Codeium” as a standalone product when the canonical source is now windsurf.com/pricing.

Source / try it: windsurf.com/pricing

Tabnine — what makes it different

What it does best

Tabnine is the only flagship inline-AI tool that ships air-gapped. The verbatim pitch on tabnine.com is “Deploy anywhere — SaaS, on-prem, or fully air-gapped — and keep everything inside,” followed by “In air-gapped or secure environments, no data leaves your infrastructure.” Cursor, Copilot, and the standalone Codeium extension are all cloud-only; Sourcegraph self-hosts but only at $16K+ enterprise. For individual seats with on-prem requirements, Tabnine is the entire market.

Pick this if you...

  • Work in a regulated industry — finance, healthcare, defense — where source code can’t leave the VPC.
  • Need genuine air-gapped inference (not a checkbox), and the legal / SOC-2 / FedRAMP paths are already part of your due diligence.
  • Value LAN-local inference latency — when the model runs on your network, you cut every internet round-trip per keystroke.
  • Are willing to pay enterprise pricing for the deployment story, not the model.

Where it shines: a defense contractor air-gapped network

An engineering team builds avionics firmware on a network that has no internet path. SaaS Copilot is a non-starter, Cursor is a non-starter, every cloud option is a non-starter. Tabnine ships an installer that runs the model on a workstation inside the perimeter — no data leaves the LAN, completions return in 20–100 ms because inference is local. Public community signal on Tabnine is thin precisely because its users are large companies that don’t post on Reddit; what surfaces is “we deployed Tabnine because the cloud options were a non-starter.”

Skip it if...

You don’t need on-prem or air-gapped — Tabnine’s SaaS at $39/user/month is hard to justify on completion quality alone, and Copilot or Windsurf will serve the same job for less money. There’s also no free tier for individuals, so casual evaluation requires going through sales.

Source / try it: tabnine.com/pricing

Sourcegraph Cody — what makes it different

What it does best

Code-graph context across multi-million-line monorepos. Cody’s thesis is that context is the bottleneck: instead of stuffing the open file plus a sliding window into the prompt, it queries Sourcegraph’s code intelligence index — the same graph that powers Sourcegraph search — and feeds the model symbol definitions, references, and call sites from across the entire repo. That advantage scales with codebase size: the bigger the monorepo, the more graph-aware retrieval beats naive file-window context.

Pick this if you...

  • Are a platform team at a large company evaluating AI assistance for a multi-million-line monorepo.
  • Already use Sourcegraph for code search — Cody rides on the same index your engineers already trust.
  • Need self-hosted AI that includes both completions and the underlying code graph (Tabnine self-hosts the model but not the cross-repo index).
  • Have a budget that can absorb Sourcegraph Enterprise pricing.

Where it shines: the giant internal monorepo

An engineer at a 2,000-developer company touches a utility used by forty internal services. Cody’s graph already knows every call site, every type contract, and every test that exercises the code path — so the completion proposes the change consistent with callers Copilot and Cursor have never seen. This is Cody’s remaining moat in 2026: file-window models can’t match it on repos where context lives across hundreds of files.

Skip it if...

You’re a solo developer or a small team. Per sourcegraph.com/pricing, the only publicly visible plan in 2026 is Enterprise “Starting at $16K, Includes credits for AI features; scales with team size” — the $9 Cody Pro tier from 2024 is gone. Tutorials still referencing Pro are stale, and if your codebase fits in a single repo’s working set, the code-graph advantage is blunted anyway.

Source / try it: sourcegraph.com/pricing

Performance considerations

We don’t publish a one-shot latency benchmark in this post — region, time of day, network, model size, and prompt shape all dominate the result enough that a single number from one machine is misleading. Here’s the methodology you can run yourself in 15 minutes:

# Pick 5 prompts that match your real workflow.
# Trigger each one in each editor, three times.
# Capture: time-to-first-suggestion, suggestion length,
#          whether you accepted, whether it compiled.

PROMPTS=(
  "Implement a debounce hook in TypeScript"
  "Write a Python function to flatten a nested dict"
  "Add error handling to an async fetch call"
  "Convert this for-loop to a list comprehension"
  "Write a Rust trait for a key-value cache"
)

# Run each prompt in each editor, with autocomplete fired
# by typing the function signature and waiting for the
# ghost text. Time from cursor-stop to first character of
# the suggestion appearing.

# Expected ranges (very rough, machine-dependent):
#   Cursor Tab           50–250 ms (small specialized model)
#   Copilot Pro          80–300 ms (network to GitHub)
#   Codeium / Windsurf   50–250 ms (small fast model)
#   Tabnine SaaS         100–400 ms (depends on tier)
#   Tabnine on-prem      20–100 ms (LAN-local inference)
#   Cody                 100–400 ms (graph fetch + model)

Three structural factors drive most of the variance:

  1. Model size. Smaller models (Cursor Tab, Codeium) win raw latency. Bigger models (Copilot’s GPT-5 mini path, Cody’s frontier-routed completions) win on suggestion quality but lose on time-to-first-token.
  2. Network distance. Tabnine’s on-prem deployment is the best-case latency story in this comparison — inference inside your LAN beats every internet round-trip. Conversely, the SaaS tiers all live in US-east or US-west datacenters; if you’re in Asia-Pacific you’re paying that round-trip on every keystroke.
  3. Suggestion shape. A “next character” prediction is cheaper than a “multi-line block.” Cursor Tab’s next-edit prediction is computationally more ambitious than Copilot’s default line completion, which is one reason Cursor invests heavily in model optimization.

Pricing matrix

All numbers below are pulled directly from each vendor’s pricing page on 2026-05-08. Treat as a snapshot — the vendors update independently and the GitHub Copilot page itself currently warns “Pricing update coming soon.”

TierCursorCopilotWindsurfTabnineCody
Free$0 (Hobby)$0 — 50 chats / 2,000 completions / mo$0 (Standard allowance)——
Entry paid$20/mo (Pro)$10/seat/mo (Pro)$20/mo (Pro)$39/user/mo (Code Assistant)Custom (Enterprise)
Mid$60/mo (Pro+)$39/seat/mo (Pro+)—$59/user/mo (Agentic)—
Top$200/mo (Ultra)Custom (Business / Enterprise)$200/mo (Max)Custom (Enterprise)$16K+/yr
Teams$40/user/moCustom (Business)$40/user/moCustomEnterprise only
On-prem❌❌Hybrid (Enterprise)✅ All paid tiers✅ Enterprise
Sourcecursor.com/pricinggithub.com/features/copilot/planswindsurf.com/pricingtabnine.com/pricingsourcegraph.com/pricing

The price-per-month story for an individual developer is Copilot Pro at $10 is the cheapest paid option, Cursor and Windsurf both anchor at $20, Tabnine starts at $39 (and is the only one with on-prem at that price), and Cody is no longer accessible to individuals.

Common pitfalls (regardless of which one you pick)

Comparing on chat / agent quality, not autocomplete

Copilot Pro+ chat is excellent. Cursor agent is excellent. Windsurf’s Cascade is excellent. None of that is what this post is about — “is the Tab suggestion fast and correct” is a separate question from “is the chat sidebar good.” If you’re comparing the agent layer, read our IDE-agent comparison instead.

Assuming Cody still has a $9 Pro tier

Cody’s 2024 Pro tier is gone from the public pricing page; the visible plan in 2026 is Enterprise starting at $16K. Tutorials and articles from 2024 still reference the Pro tier and are now stale. If you’re an individual developer, treat Cody as “not available” until Sourcegraph publishes a new self-serve tier.

Treating Cursor Tab as a drop-in for Copilot

Cursor Tab requires the Cursor IDE. You can’t install it as an extension into stock VS Code. If you’re evaluating “the model” you have to evaluate the editor switch alongside it. The good news is Cursor is a VS Code fork, so most extensions and key bindings carry over.

Ignoring the Codeium → Windsurf rebrand

Older comparison articles compare “Codeium” as a standalone product. In 2026, codeium.com 301s to windsurf.com, and the standalone extension lives under the Windsurf brand. Pricing tiers on windsurf.com/pricing are the canonical source — anything else is stale.

Buying Tabnine SaaS for the wrong reason

Tabnine SaaS at $39/user/month is hard to justify on completion quality alone — you’re paying for the on-prem and air-gapped deployment options. If your company doesn’t need those, Copilot or Windsurf will serve the same job for less money. Tabnine’s differentiator is deployment, not model.

Underestimating “ghosting” on Copilot

Copilot users have long reported the suggestion disappearing mid-type — the “ghost” vanishes just as you go to accept it. Microsoft and GitHub have iterated on this; it’s less common in 2026 than it was in 2023, but it still happens. If you depend on a steady acceptance rhythm, this is worth a 1-week trial before you commit your team.

Community signal

The honest community read on these five tools is mostly in long Reddit threads and individual blog posts; we’re not going to fabricate Hacker News quotes for the comparison. Here’s the pattern that’s consistent across the threads we’ve read on r/cursor, r/github, and r/ChatGPTCoding.

Cursor Tab wins on subjective acceptance rate among power users who’ve actually switched. The most-repeated phrase in those threads is some variant of “Tab predicts what I was about to do.” This is the “next action” framing from cursor.com/features showing up as lived experience.

Copilot wins on procurement and stability. The most-repeated phrase: “our company already has Copilot, so I just use Copilot.” That’s a real advantage and it’s sticky — “default that the infosec team already approved” is a hard moat to cross.

Codeium / Windsurf wins on free-tier mind share. The pattern in budget-conscious developer threads: “I used Codeium free for two years before paying anyone.” The Windsurf rebrand muddied this signal in 2025 but the free tier lived through the transition.

Tabnine wins on enterprise installs you only hear about in passing. Public community signal is thin because Tabnine’s users are large companies that don’t post on Reddit; the community sentiment that does surface is “we deployed Tabnine because the cloud options were a non-starter,” which is unenthusiastic praise but real adoption.

Cody has the smallest current community signal of the five — the move to Enterprise-only pricing cleared out the individual-developer audience that used to post about it. The remaining signal is from platform teams at large companies who are evaluating Cody specifically for monorepo context.

Frequently asked questions

What's the difference between Cursor Tab and GitHub Copilot?

Both ship inline ghost-text suggestions you accept with Tab, but they live in different IDEs and predict different things. Cursor Tab is built into the Cursor editor and is described on cursor.com/features as a "specialized Tab model [that] predicts your next action with striking speed and precision" — it predicts edits across multiple lines, including jumping to a different part of the file. GitHub Copilot is a VS Code / JetBrains extension that defaults to predicting the next character or line under the cursor and bolts on a separate Chat / Agent surface. If you live in Cursor, Tab is included free with the editor's hobby plan; if your org standardizes on VS Code with corporate compliance, Copilot Pro is $10/seat/month per github.com/features/copilot/plans.

Is Codeium free for commercial use?

The standalone Codeium extension was free for individual use and remains so under the Windsurf brand — codeium.com 301-redirects to windsurf.com, and windsurf.com/pricing lists a Free tier ($0/month) with a daily/weekly Standard usage allowance. The detail to check before deploying at work: "individual use" historically excluded organizations above a headcount threshold, so verify the current Terms of Service for your team. The Pro plan ($20/month) and Teams plan ($40/user/month) are the unambiguous commercial-safe choices.

Which AI autocomplete is fastest?

Latency is workload- and region-specific, and we don't have an independent third-party benchmark to cite for 2026 numbers. The two structural factors that matter: (1) whether the suggestion model is small and edge-routed (Cursor Tab and Codeium both run smaller, latency-tuned models) versus a large frontier model (Copilot Pro+ with GPT-5 mini for completions, Tabnine with bigger context-aware models), and (2) network distance to the inference endpoint. Tabnine's on-prem deployment trades raw model size for low LAN latency. The honest answer is: run a 5-prompt test on your own machine before committing.

Can I run Tabnine on-prem?

Yes — this is Tabnine's headline differentiator. Verbatim from tabnine.com: "Deploy anywhere — SaaS, on-prem, or fully air-gapped — and keep everything inside." The Code Assistant Platform tier is $39/user/month and the Agentic Platform tier is $59/user/month (annual subscription) per tabnine.com/pricing, both of which include the on-prem and air-gapped deployment options. None of Cursor, Copilot, or the standalone Codeium extension offer a true air-gapped option for individual developers; Sourcegraph's enterprise tier is the only other competitor with comparable self-hosted credentials, and that starts at $16K/year per sourcegraph.com/pricing.

How does Sourcegraph Cody handle large monorepos?

Cody's pitch has always been code-graph context: instead of stuffing the open file plus a sliding window into the prompt, it queries Sourcegraph's index of your repo and pulls in the symbols, definitions, and call sites the model actually needs. That advantage scales with repo size — the bigger the codebase, the more useful graph-aware retrieval becomes versus naive file-window context. As of 2026, Cody is integrated into Sourcegraph Enterprise (sourcegraph.com/pricing shows the Enterprise plan starting at $16K with credits for AI features), which means it's a non-starter for solo developers but the canonical pick for engineering organizations with multi-million-line monorepos.

Cursor Tab vs Copilot — which model is smarter?

They're solving different problems. Copilot's chat / agent surfaces use frontier models (GPT-5, Claude Sonnet, Gemini 2.5 — selectable on Pro+ at $39/month per github.com/features/copilot/plans) and will write multi-file features given a prompt. Cursor's Tab is specifically a small, fast "specialized Tab model" (per cursor.com/features) tuned for inline next-edit prediction; for chat / agent work, Cursor lets you pick frontier models on its $20/month Pro plan or $60/month Pro+ tier. "Smarter at autocomplete" usually means Cursor Tab; "smarter at chat" depends on which frontier model your tier unlocks.

Do any of these support local LLMs (Ollama)?

None of the five flagship products in this comparison routes through a local Ollama by default. Tabnine's air-gapped deployment is the closest match: the model runs inside your VPC or on-prem hardware, but it's Tabnine's own model, not Ollama. If you specifically want Ollama-backed inline autocomplete, you're outside this comparison set — look at the Continue.dev VS Code extension, Aider in CLI, or the Cody Local Inference (where available) experimental option. Our /blog/ollama-vs-lm-studio-vs-jan-vs-localai-vs-vllm-2026 piece covers the local-LLM runner choices that pair with those clients.

What's the best free AI autocomplete in 2026?

Two contenders depending on your IDE. If you live in Cursor, the Hobby plan ($0, no credit card per cursor.com/pricing) includes Tab completions and limited Agent requests — and the Tab model is the headline feature you're getting for free. If you live in VS Code or JetBrains, Windsurf's free tier (formerly Codeium, $0 with a daily/weekly Standard allowance per windsurf.com/pricing) is the most generous free autocomplete and the only one with broad IDE support without a paid upgrade. GitHub Copilot's free tier (50 chats / 2,000 completions per month) is functional but more capped than either.

Sources

Cursor

GitHub Copilot

Codeium / Windsurf

  • windsurf.com/pricing — Free, Pro ($20), Max ($200), Teams ($40/user), Enterprise (custom)
  • codeium.com — 301-redirects to windsurf.com, confirming the rebrand

Tabnine

  • tabnine.com — “Deploy anywhere — SaaS, on-prem, or fully air-gapped” positioning
  • tabnine.com/pricing — Code Assistant ($39/user), Agentic Platform ($59/user)

Sourcegraph Cody

Internal cross-links

Keep reading

Comparison

Cursor vs Windsurf vs Antigravity vs Kiro (2026)

Read

Comparison · placeholder

Goose vs Cline vs Aider vs Claude Code vs OpenCode

Post in progress

Comparison

Ollama vs LM Studio vs Jan vs LocalAI vs vLLM (2026)

Read