61–70 of 169 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We did a lot of internal testing and thought this model was already quite useful for release.
Makes sense! I like that you guys are more open about it. The other labs just drop stuff from the ivory tower. I think your style matches better with engineers who are used to datasheets etc. and usually don't like poking a black box
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it true that Cheetah is Grok Code Fast 2? Does this mean that the new Cursor model is also based on Grok?
Cheetah was an earlier (and dumber) version of this model that we used to test production speed. They are both developed in-house. If you liked Cheetah, give this model a try.
Hi everyone, I am an ML researcher at Cursor, and worked on this project. Would love to hear any feedback you may have on the model, and can answer question about the blog post.
Which model did you distill it from? Great work! PS getting a few scenarios where it doesn't follow rules as well as sonnet 4.5
Could anyone explain how to use multiple agents and subagents in Cursor, Claude Code, or others? It is already challenging to me taming one model doing work, let alone synchronizing multiple parallel workers. Do you have to split the plan in parallelizable tasks that could be worked in parallel in one codebase without breaking and confusing the other agents?
People on here love to be contrarian about Cursor, but I’ve tried all the popular alternatives (Copilot, Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cline) and found Cursor’s overall experience to just be unmatched. A big part of that is its speed, another its reliability. It’s the only coding agent I’m actually really motivated to use out of the box because it really does make me feel more productive while the others keep messi…
You tried Claude and still prefer cursor?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You tried Claude and still prefer cursor?
Absolutely. CC can be tuned to not do too much crap on its own, but even with the new extension its IDE integration and multi thread management are still significantly worse, as is its status reporting, which I find to be very important. Also, somehow magically, I’ve found Cursor’s Auto mode to be significantly faster than the specific models I’ve tried, Claude being among them.
Maybe I'm an outlier but Sonnet 4.5 quality is about as low as I'm willing to go. It's generation speed is not the problem or the time sink. It's wrestling with it to get the right output. --- And just to clarify as maybe I misunderstood again but people are comparing cursor to Claude Code and codex etc here- isn't this whole article all cursor just using different models?
There’s two different kinds of users, on one side people are more hands off and want the model to autonomously handle longer tasks on its own with minimal guidance, and on the other side is users who want to interactively collaborate with the model to produce desired results. Speed matters much more for the second case, where you know what you want and just want the model to implement whatever you had in mind as quic…
People on here love to be contrarian about Cursor, but I’ve tried all the popular alternatives (Copilot, Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cline) and found Cursor’s overall experience to just be unmatched. A big part of that is its speed, another its reliability. It’s the only coding agent I’m actually really motivated to use out of the box because it really does make me feel more productive while the others keep messi…