"Should I use Antigravity, Cursor, or Bolt?" is a question I see constantly in developer communities — and the frustrating honest answer is: it depends on what you're building.
I've used all three on real projects over the past several months, and the differences are significant enough that picking the wrong tool for the job costs real time. Here's what I've actually found.
They're Targeting Different Developers
Before diving into the comparison, it's worth establishing that these three tools aren't really competing for the same user.
Antigravity (Google's AI IDE, formerly Project IDX with deeper Gemma integration) is built around the Google ecosystem. Firebase, Android Studio, Gemini API, Vertex AI — the integrations are tighter than any other tool. If you're working with Google's stack, Antigravity gets you to working code faster because it actually knows the current APIs.
Cursor is for developers who already have a codebase. It's VSCode-compatible, understands large projects, and excels at code review, refactoring suggestions, and making targeted changes while respecting the surrounding code. It's the tool for "I want AI assistance but I want to stay in control."
Bolt.new optimizes for speed from zero. Its strength is generating a working-looking UI and basic logic from a natural language description — in minutes. It's prototype territory; the handoff to production quality requires significant rework.
Code Quality: It Depends on the Task
I tested all three against the same requirements: a Firebase auth + Firestore + Gemini API app targeting iOS and Android. Here's what stood out.
Where Antigravity wins: Google service integration code quality is noticeably better. Firebase security rules, Vertex AI SDK usage, Jetpack Compose patterns — Antigravity consistently produced current best practices where the other tools returned deprecated APIs or older patterns. This makes sense: Google prioritizes its own ecosystem in Antigravity's training data.
Where Cursor wins: Understanding and modifying existing code. When working in a TypeScript project with thousands of lines, Cursor's suggestions account for the surrounding codebase. "Will this change break other files?" — Cursor gives you a contextually aware answer. Antigravity's cross-file reasoning is still catching up.
Where Bolt wins: Speed from zero to something that looks like an app. If you need a client demo in an hour, Bolt generates presentable UI faster than either of the others. Just don't expect production-ready code underneath.
Response Speed: Measured, Not Just Felt
Actual response times from the same Wi-Fi connection across a code completion task:
Cursor (Claude 3.7 Sonnet backend): 1.2–2.0s
Antigravity (Gemini 2.5 Pro backend): 1.5–3.0s
Bolt.new: 3.0–8.0s (scales with project size)
Antigravity's latency is tied to Gemini API load — during peak hours it's noticeably slower. Cursor lets you switch backends, so you can lean on Claude's stability. If raw response speed matters for your workflow, Cursor has an edge right now.
That said, speed alone doesn't justify the choice. If Antigravity's Firebase integration saves you 30 minutes of API debugging per session, a half-second slower completion doesn't matter much.
Pricing in Context
As of May 2026:
- Antigravity: Free tier (Gemini 2.5 Flash), Pro at ~$19/month
- Cursor: Free tier (limited), Pro at $20/month
- Bolt.new: Free tier (20 generations/month), Pro at $20/month
Essentially equivalent on price. The real cost difference shows up at scale: Antigravity's Gemini API usage is metered separately, so heavy generation workloads can run up additional costs beyond the subscription.
How I Actually Choose Between Them
Here's the decision framework I've settled on after months of switching between all three:
Use Antigravity when:
- You're building with Firebase, Android, or Gemini API
- You need Gemma 4 on-device or via Vertex AI
- The project is Google-ecosystem-first
Use Cursor when:
- You have an existing codebase (any size, any language)
- Your work is mostly modifications and refactoring, not greenfield
- You're working on a team where context-awareness matters
Use Bolt when:
- You need a prototype or MVP in hours
- Design matters more than architecture at this stage
- You want something to show a client before committing to an approach
My current setup: Antigravity for new Google ecosystem projects, Cursor for everything else. I use Bolt occasionally as a sketch tool — not as a standalone environment.
What to Watch For at Google I/O 2026
Google I/O is scheduled for May 19, 2026, and Antigravity updates are expected to be announced. Rumored additions include improved VS Code compatibility mode and stronger multimodal support. If either lands, the gap with Cursor on the "existing codebase" front could narrow considerably.
If you're currently on Cursor but Antigravity-curious, it might be worth waiting a few weeks before committing to a workflow change.
None of these tools is universally "best." The question is which fits your specific development style and project type — and hopefully this comparison makes that decision a little clearer.