If users start questioning the ROI of your AI product just hide the “I” from them. Problem solved.
Cursor removed cost information from the usage page and CSV export
51–60 of 172 posts
Re: Cursor removed cost information from the usage page and CSV export
#52Cursor you have a beautiful comeback story, you have a wonderful model with Composer 2.5, and a terrific behemoth with Grok 4.5 now. A top-tier dev ux with the Cursor agent app, why on earth are you squandering this opportunity and behaving this way? You came back from the dead pretty much and now you're pissing it away for what exactly? Do not spite your individual developer customers or you will perish yet again.
If they were smart, they'd rebrand Grok to Composer. Nobody wants to use the Nazi model.
Re: Cursor removed cost information from the usage page and CSV export
#53This month I've noticed that my Cursor model use has gone up faster with Composer 2.5 - I have bothered with Grok yet. Despite the advertised twice-the-usage on Cursor own models I'd say it's burning faster.
Re: Cursor removed cost information from the usage page and CSV export
#54Cursor has been my corporate vendor for accessing non-anthropic models. Without cost insights and with no ability to proxy API requests its value drops dramatically. They fought hard for a renewal with legacy pricing mode then broke the deal soon thereafter. I’ll be extremely clear to leadership that Cursor usage should be minimized and not renewed. I frankly don’t trust them with IP either, and you shouldn’t either, especially if you’re demonstrably not in a big enterprise.
Re: Cursor removed cost information from the usage page and CSV export
#55I can only recommend to regularly measure how many tokens a harness+model combination uses for a certain task There are huge token efficiency/bloat differences between agents while working on the same tasks, using the same model, in the same environment Yesterday I ran 10 agentic tasks using GPT 5.6 Sol in an ubuntu 26.04 vm a couple of times with different harnesses and got vastly different token usage. +-----------…
Running some local models and wondering what insanity was consuming 100k+ tokens to respond to "hello world" was rather eye-opening, yeah. Full of pointless fluff.
Re: Cursor removed cost information from the usage page and CSV export
#56I was an early and passionate adopter and paying customer of Cursor (since 2023!), but it’s probably been 6 months since I opened it. These days I “write” code with claude code and codex, and read/review it on GitHub. If I need to read it locally, I use a plain text editor. Can someone help me understand what value cursor offers in 2026?
Code and reasoning generated by Opus/Fable via Cursor seems to be quite better than Claude Code's for the same prompt.
Does that mean you’re paying api prices + cursor markup (?), or can you somehow piggyback on your Claude subscription? Fable via the API is really too expensive
Re: Cursor removed cost information from the usage page and CSV export
#57I can only recommend to regularly measure how many tokens a harness+model combination uses for a certain task There are huge token efficiency/bloat differences between agents while working on the same tasks, using the same model, in the same environment Yesterday I ran 10 agentic tasks using GPT 5.6 Sol in an ubuntu 26.04 vm a couple of times with different harnesses and got vastly different token usage. +-----------…
What tools are you using to run the comparison? Or are you just running the prompts and checking them with something like ccusage? I’m asking because I’ve been looking for agent harness comparison tools too. I’m interested in more than just the inputs and outputs—I also want the system prompts, traces, and tool calls. It’s useful to understand why Codex, for example, uses more tokens while Pi doesn’t. Fewer tokens ar…
I built an ad-hoc custom comparison framework to inspect system prompts, caching behaviour, tool call outputs, exact api requests and responses and so on
I agree fewer tokens is not necessarily better but a bit counter-intuitively often the harness using fewer tokens is not only done faster but has better results
(that said: of course check the results, look at the full traces, agree!)
Re: Cursor removed cost information from the usage page and CSV export
#58Cursor you have a beautiful comeback story, you have a wonderful model with Composer 2.5, and a terrific behemoth with Grok 4.5 now. A top-tier dev ux with the Cursor agent app, why on earth are you squandering this opportunity and behaving this way? You came back from the dead pretty much and now you're pissing it away for what exactly? Do not spite your individual developer customers or you will perish yet again.
If they were smart, they'd rebrand Grok to Composer. Nobody wants to use the Nazi model.
Given that cursor has been bought by Musk, the nazi branding might be on purpose
Re: Cursor removed cost information from the usage page and CSV export
#59Cursor you have a beautiful comeback story, you have a wonderful model with Composer 2.5, and a terrific behemoth with Grok 4.5 now. A top-tier dev ux with the Cursor agent app, why on earth are you squandering this opportunity and behaving this way? You came back from the dead pretty much and now you're pissing it away for what exactly? Do not spite your individual developer customers or you will perish yet again.
If they were smart, they'd rebrand Grok to Composer. Nobody wants to use the Nazi model.
please, you're dramatically overestimating who gives a shit about this.
Re: Cursor removed cost information from the usage page and CSV export
#60[dead]