Cursor vs Irmu
Cursor vs Irmu: score breakdown
Cursor scores 85/100 against 64/100 for Irmu, a 21-point gap.
Features and platforms
| Feature | Cursor | Irmu |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Freemium | Freemium |
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Platforms | Web, REST API, MCP server | |
| Best for | Developers seeking AI-native code editing with deep context and multi-file refactoring. | Solo developers and small teams building data pipelines who want one API key for scraping, rendering, and AI extraction. |
| Skip if | Teams needing multi-step browser automation or a standalone proxy endpoint today; those features are planned but not yet available. |
Cost and usage limits
Cursor has a free plan; paid plans start at $20/month (Pro). Irmu has a free plan.
Prices from each vendor's pricing page. Cursor checked August 2026 · Irmu checked November 2026
Pros and cons
Cursor
- Composer enables multi-file edits via natural-language prompts, a rare capability among AI editors.
- Tab autocomplete powered by proprietary models predicts edits across lines and files.
- Privacy Mode and SOC-2 compliance give teams control over code retention and security.
- Cursor is a standalone editor, so developers deeply invested in VS Code or JetBrains must switch environments.
- Usage caps (agent requests, model credits) can be hit unexpectedly without a clear in-editor dashboard.
- No native GitHub PR review or issue integration like GitHub Copilot offers.
Irmu
- Single credit pool covers scraping, JavaScript rendering, screenshots, AI extraction, Google SERP, Google AI Overviews, ChatGPT answers, and Booking.com data, with no separate keys or quotas per API.
- Geotargeting by country, region, and city is free on every request and every plan, including the free tier, which is uncommon among comparable scraping APIs.
- MCP server with OAuth 2.1 or API key auth lets developers connect Irmu directly to Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT without writing REST integration code.
- Both the Proxy API (standalone IP pool endpoint) and the Browser API (multi-step scripted sessions) are listed as planned features but are not part of the live product, making the product page misleading for developers who need those capabilities now.
- Premium residential IPs and AI extraction are locked behind the $90/month Standard plan; the $19 Starter and $40 Lite tiers only offer datacenter IPs, which limits their usefulness against sites with meaningful anti-bot protection.
- Scheduling and webhooks, essential for any recurring crawl job, only appear at the $200/month Pro tier, forcing teams with modest volume but recurring needs to pay for 3,000,000 credits per month whether they use them or not.
Our verdict
Cursor verdict
Cursor is ideal for developers who want an editor that deeply understands their codebase and supports natural-language multi-file edits, thanks to features like Composer and Tab. It’s weaker for those tied to VS Code or JetBrains workflows or who need transparent usage dashboards. If you rely heavily on GitHub-centric workflows or need built-in PR review, GitHub Copilot may serve you better.
Read full Cursor review →Irmu verdict
Irmu suits developers who want a single API key covering scraping, JavaScript rendering, screenshots, and AI extraction without stitching together separate services. The credit model is transparent and geotargeting is free at every tier, but residential IPs and AI extraction only enable at the $90/month Standard plan, putting real production features out of reach for the $19 and $40 tiers. Teams that need multi-step browser automation or a dedicated proxy endpoint should look elsewhere: both are listed on the roadmap but not yet shipped.
Read full Irmu review →