Cursor 2 - Not better than 1.5!

Ideas Feedback
1

I want to say something because it concerns an executive decision Cursor made recently with its new model.

Cursor 1.5 was an epiphany! It showed perfect understanding, it worked thoroughly through any task at hand, and delivered what it was asked to deliver. It examined extensively codebase and showed concern and will to provide grounded answers and solutions.

Cursor 2 is just an average approximation. I understand that it is cheaper, and that strategically an expensive model is not a good choice for a vendor model, but… It is not like 1.5, and definitely not better.

Cursor 2 is spending a ridiculously large amount of tokens in thinking garbage (thankfully we can only see a few things from this). It also has a lot of attitude - yes in some cases it is for safety, which is not always bad, but for matters of architecture it gets on the way and I have to change model just to proceed with implementation of my directions.

Anyone else having the same experience?

1 Like
3

I do a ton of iteration rather then really big plans and tasks. When i first started using composer 2 it felt like it had not been as good. I’ve started using it for more and more and even planning. Its really hard to say its much better then composer 1.5 but its still quite good.
I’ve had claude models give broken changes more lately.

I use convex + nextjs a lot so i think this may be highly dependent on how good your existing DX is.

4

yes. I posted about this too here: Bring back Composer 1.5 (it never made mistakes)

Also Composer 1.5 is auto-replaced with Composer 2.0 Fast (so can’t no longer be used)