Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

cursor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 238 posts

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#121

Post by vessenes »

throwaw12 wrote: post #78

> Composer 2.5 is built on the same open-source checkpoint as Composer 2, Moonshot's Kimi K2.5. Really nice to see they're giving credit to the company and I am optimistic Kimi K open models soon will outperform Opus models

Sounds like it's the last Kimi-line model at Cursor? As expected they say they'll be training a larger model on the SpaceX infrastructure, or have already started most likely.

I'm very curious to read about the Composer 3 architecture when it comes out. More frontier coding models are a good thing, especially if they diversify into different strengths/weaknesses.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#122

Post by 0fes911 »

I found composer 2 pretty good as a subagent delegating tasks like auditing for bugs after finishing implementation, but hopefully composer 2.5 will be more reliable so it can be used to implement and execute long running tasks.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#123

Post by vessenes »

memoryleakgame wrote: post #33

If these benches from their site hold up (they likely wont) Wouldn't this compress ai revenue like 15x quickly If they really have a 4.7 opus high equivalent at 1/16 the cost wouldn't this significantly effect all the current capex and planing Maybe they are getting elon to cover cost

It's worth being specific:

"Will this decrease Revenue?" -- only if demand for high quality tokens is inelastic. If demand is instead elastic (grows with cheaper pricing) then revenue will likely increase.

"Will this lower earnings?" -- they have a current inference margin for their old models, and with the Elon deal in place, they have a new inference margin. It might be better or worse than their old one. If it's worse, then they'd need to see a concomitant increase in usage. If they don't, then yes it might lower earnings.

"Will this lower corporate value?" -- no - not least because this company is going to be owned by SpaceX approximately 90 days after IPO -- so all the new owner will care about is being benchmark competitive with Anthropic and oAI for the first n quarters. If they can do that, it will massively increase the corporate value of SX; it's hard to build a frontier lab.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#124

Post by kilroy123 »

goyozi wrote: post #62

I kind of want to try it, to see if and how far they can take an open model and improve it but I really don’t miss the Cursor user experience. Constant UI changes, half-baked features, smaller and smaller limits, useless AI change attribution; I think I’ll wait for others to report if it’s any good.

I 100% agree. It's soooo buggy.

I gave up, canceled my plan, and went back to boring old VSCode. It feels so much more stable, and my Mac no longer runs out of memory. With cursor I had to reboot my macbook several times a week and had to always be plugged in.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#125

Post by make3 »

DeathArrow wrote: post #100
make3 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why is that part impressive specifically? they got purchased by SpaceX, they have access to infinite compute and cash now. & now they're still losing all of their users to Claude Code and Codex.

>& now they're still losing all of their users to Claude Code and Codex. Why pay for Cursor when I can use GLM 5.1, Kimi K2.6, MiniMax M2.7, Xiaomi MiMo V2.5 Pro and Deepseek v4 for cheap and use whatever harness I want, including Claude Code. It's not like Cursor harness is the best out there. And even if I want to edit the code, I don't need to run the agent harness in an IDE.

these are in the trillion parameters range, not sure it's actually that cheap to have at a reasonable speed without quality degradation & without like.. your own DGX B200

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#126

Post by kilroy123 »

Lionga wrote: post #10
asar wrote: post #2

The model is (like Composer 2) based on Kimi K2.5 and they claim SOTA performance for 1/10th of the cost. The tweet also mentions that they've started a new model from scratch on Colossus 2 (xAI/SpaceX Cluster). Really impressive how they've made this jump from being called the vscode fork with no moat just a couple of months ago.

They are still a vscode fork with no moat? Like they lost about 70% of users in half a year which goes to show how there is not even the tiniest of moat.

I think it's going to be brutal for them to compete with OpenAI and Anthropic.

I switched to claude code because of usage. For $200 a month, I would run out of usage halfway through the month. Then be forced to use their composer model or whatever slow, dumb model they served up in their "auto" mode.

For that same $200 a month, I could use claude code and basically never hit usage limits.

I don't understand what people are doing who run into the limits on that max x20 plan. I NEVER have.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#127

Post by presentation »

ttouch wrote: post #116
goyozi wrote: post #62

I kind of want to try it, to see if and how far they can take an open model and improve it but I really don’t miss the Cursor user experience. Constant UI changes, half-baked features, smaller and smaller limits, useless AI change attribution; I think I’ll wait for others to report if it’s any good.

you can use either the cursor cli and/or zed editor with cursor as the underlying provider with ACP (agent context protocol)

Tried that, it just seemed way dumber this way unfortunately. And the zed UI provided 0 visibility whenever it was doing tool calls, and for some reason it kept running sleep 30 calls because it couldn’t figure out how to see the results of its own tool calls for some reason.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#128

Post by brunooliv »

Any reason why they indexed on Kimi K2.5 model? I have tried many open-source ones in Opencode, and, in my experience (standard backend development, Java, Python, Spring, etc) Qwen3.6 is SO MUCH BETTER that's shocking. Kimi can't even get most tool calling arguments right.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#129

Post by Bombthecat »

brunooliv wrote: post #128

Any reason why they indexed on Kimi K2.5 model? I have tried many open-source ones in Opencode, and, in my experience (standard backend development, Java, Python, Spring, etc) Qwen3.6 is SO MUCH BETTER that's shocking. Kimi can't even get most tool calling arguments right.

Cheaper to run?

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#130

Post by indiantinker »

goyozi wrote: post #62

I kind of want to try it, to see if and how far they can take an open model and improve it but I really don’t miss the Cursor user experience. Constant UI changes, half-baked features, smaller and smaller limits, useless AI change attribution; I think I’ll wait for others to report if it’s any good.

I agree. I quit cursor and replaced it with conductor and a mix of Claude Code / Codex/ Copilot and i dont miss it as such. Maybe one day I will come back.
Post reply on HN