Which is more popular, Cursor or gpt-code-assistant?

Cursor has more GitHub stars (33,257 vs 208).

Which is more actively developed, Cursor or gpt-code-assistant?

Cursor had more commits in the last 90 days (0 vs 0).

Compare their capabilities, limitations and "best for" notes above. Trying each on a small task is the fastest way to decide.

Side-by-side comparison of two AI agent tools

gpt-code-assistant has had no commit in 38 months; Cursor is actively maintained.
Cursor is growing faster: +116 GitHub stars in the last 30 days vs +0 for gpt-code-assistant.
Pick Cursor for: the AI Code Editor. Pick gpt-code-assistant for: gpt-code-assistant is an open-source coding assistant leveraging language models to search, retrieve, explore.

From GitHub data refreshed daily.

The AI Code Editor

gpt-code-assistant is an open-source coding assistant leveraging language models to search, retrieve, explore and understand any codebase.

+High community adoption with 32,000+ GitHub stars indicating strong developer interest
+Combines traditional code editing with AI coding agent capabilities in a single tool
+Active community support through dedicated forum for user feedback and feature requests

-Limited public documentation available about specific features and capabilities
-Requires download and installation rather than being browser-based for immediate access

•Developers looking to integrate AI assistance directly into their code editing workflow
•Teams wanting to combine traditional IDE functionality with modern AI coding capabilities
•Programmers seeking an AI-enhanced alternative to conventional code editors

Which is more popular, Cursor or gpt-code-assistant?: Cursor has more GitHub stars (33,257 vs 208).
Which is more actively developed, Cursor or gpt-code-assistant?: Cursor had more commits in the last 90 days (0 vs 0).
Should I use Cursor or gpt-code-assistant?: Compare their capabilities, limitations and "best for" notes above. Trying each on a small task is the fastest way to decide.