AI in your IDE (e.g. Cursor) vs AI in your terminal (Claude Code) — what’s the better flow?
by•
AI coding tools seem to come in two main flavors: IDE-based, like @Cursor and @GitHub Copilot, and terminal-based setups, like using @Claude Code to generate commands, scripts, or entire files. Both have their fans, but which one actually helps you move faster?
Curious what flow people are sticking with long term, and where you see the most gains (or frustrations).
3.8K views
Replies
Onyx
I've got Codex and Claude Code both loaded in my Cursor. Kind of use it as a poor man's multi agent (only issue is that they work on the same branch). Main thing for me is that Cursor seems to be getting way worse and maintaining context, finding relevant code/patterns, etc, no matter which model I use (max mode only too). I usually opt for Codex first then Claude Code as a backup
I stick with IDE-based AI — it keeps me in the flow.
Been defaulting to Claude Code for everything lately, partly because once you're running multi-agent setups the terminal-native approach just makes more sense - you're already orchestrating things via shell anyway. The IDE feels too click-y when you're coordinating multiple agents across different tasks. That said, Cursor still wins for quick targeted edits where I know exactly what I want - no need to context-switch into a whole conversation for something that's two lines.