Google just dropped "Antigravity" (antigravity.google) and claims it's an "Agent-First" IDE. I've been using Cursor heavily for the past few months, so I decided to give this a spin to see if it's just hype or a real competitor.

My key takeaways after testing it:

• The "Agent Manager" is the real deal: Unlike the linear chat in VS Code/Cursor, here you can spawn multiple agent threads. I managed to have one agent refactoring a messy LegacyUserProfile.js component while another agent was writing Jest tests for it simultaneously. It feels more like orchestration than coding.

• Model Access: It currently offers Gemini 3 Pro and Claude 3.5 Sonnet for free during the preview. That alone makes it worth the download.

• Installation: It's a VS Code fork, so migration (extensions, keybindings) took about 30 seconds.

The "Vibe Coding" Trap: I noticed that because it's so powerful, it's easy to get lazy. I did a test run generating a Frontend component from a screenshot.

• Attempt 1 (Lazy prompt): The code worked but the CSS was messy.

• Attempt 2 (Senior prompt): I explicitly asked for BEM methodology and semantic HTML. The result was production-ready.

Conclusion: It might not kill Cursor today, but the multi-agent workflow is definitely superior for complex tasks.

I made a full video breakdown showing the installation and the 3-agent demo in action if you want to see the UI: https://youtu.be/M06VEfzFHZY?si=W_3OVIzrSJY4IXBv

Has anyone else tried the multi-agent feature yet? How does it compare to Windsurf's flows for you?

If you love vibe coding: https://antigravity.google/

Supports models other than gemini such as GPT-OSS. Hopefully we will get instructions for running local models soon.

Update: Title should more appropriately say : windsurf clone . https://www.reuters.com/business/google-hires-windsurf-ceo-researchers-advance-ai-ambitions-2025-07-11/

I have watched the video for developers by Antigravity. What edge will Antigravity have over its competitive IDEs in the market? I would have thought about spawning browsers but Cursor did that in 2.0. Will it be price point in the teams plan which is not released yet? Or compete over the behavioural patterns of a developer?

Hello everyone! As I noticed, the recent AI race is becoming increasingly aggressive and intensive, with many companies fighting for dominance, which is good since it means we have more choices.

I am currently looking into Cursor, Claude Code, ChatGPT Codex, Qwen Code, Antigravity (Google AI plan) and Microsoft Copilot. I feel there is just too much choices nowadays. I am thinking of buying an AI subscription, so I can have a higher limit.

Which is why, from all of the choices, which would you pick to buy a premium subscription from? I am currently planning to use it to build some apps and websites, so love to hear which would you guys prefer if you are buying an AI Subscription today.

Edit: I currently got a budget of $20 monthly, so I am looking to use premium solutions.

https://antigravity.google/

Well, I just created a portfolio website out of it, used multiple AI variants (Gemini pro 3 high and low variants supported, Claude Sonnet 4.5 + thinking, GPT OSS 120b medium), though there is this model limit problem, but to use for free seems good! Limit resets after like 4 hours!

Hey everyone,

I just got anti gravity and I think I'm having some issues

I.e. I'm happy with Feature A, and 50 prompts later into other features, Feature A no longer works

Is this normal with vibe coding?

Did anyone use antigravity? And what were your thoughts about it? Is it better than Cursor, or is Cursor still better?

Have been on cursor from very early days. Massive fan. Top tier user. Tried most other IDE didn’t like it.

Then tried Antigravity yesterday. I like it. Took a bit of time to understand their UI etc.

Its planning and managing of tasks is very well done. Had good outcome for a day I have spent so far.

Anyone else comparing? Thoughts?

What are your recommendations? I have seen so much hype around AG, is this worth the hype? Help me get a substantial understand on major diffs between them and use cases

So I stumbled upon Google’s Antigravity IDE this morning. Their developer plan is a lot more generous than how Cursor prices its plans. The developer plan has higher rate limits that refresh every five hours, as opposed to Cursor, which makes you wait an entire billing cycle for the rate limit to reset, or charges you extra if you don’t want to wait.

Has anyone tried Antigravity by Google yet? If so, what are your impressions? Is it worth switching?

This is directed at Cursor....if you’re reading this, you need to restructure your plans so users aren’t rate-limited early or charged excessively after using Opus 4.5. You’ve got competition now.

Antigravity is out for a couple of days now, and I have been amazed by its capability to just one shot a lot of tasks. Now I am thinking of leaving Cursor (cancelling subscription) for Antigravity. What is your opinion on that? Is Antigravtiy actually better?

Also saw that Cursor now started to copy some Antigravity features as well, but still its a costly subscription.

Will it perform better or cheaper than Cursor?

What does it mean for non-developers like me? Can I vibecode with it better?

https://antigravity.google/

I have been using Claude code for 5 months now. I tried codex and didn't like it; it was slow, cumbersome, and made way too many requests even after proper clarification, e.g., I am using bash, here are the right commands to use, and it would still mess up, and consume time. However I tried google antigravity today, and let me tell you something. It is not ready for prime time or even a beta. I shared a sample project with it. It was a python application with well written readme, architecture, threat model, using the available sonnet 4.5 model via antigravity. It straight up failed, by making a fix then corrupting a file, then removing functions, unable to restore from git checkpoints, and finally the agents timing out after trying to fix for 2/3 minutes. It was sad. I have never seen this issue with CC or Codex. My files were around 2k lines, but the readme, and architecture are very well documented, explain the flow, the tooling on Google AG seems very bad! would not recommend for now, If you are happy with CC / Codex stick with it.

I think that Google Antigravity is better than Cursor.

Has anyone here used Google's Antigravity IDE yet?

I recently tested it out for a web stack project—the interface is very VS Code-like, and the AI (Gemini 3) squashed some long-standing bugs for me and even helped refactor a dormant project back to life. The whole multi-agent setup (where you can spawn coding, review, and refactor agents) is wild for streamlining bigger repos.

Curious:

- Do you find it just a polished VS Code clone with better AI, or does it offer something truly unique?

- Anyone pushed the agentic features in real-world workflows?

- Have you tried Chrome integration or in-IDE API testing?

- How does it stack up to Cursor and other AI IDEs?

Would love actual dev feedback—especially from those who've tried it on mid-to-large codebases.

After trying Antigravity with gemini 3 for an hour I can say that cursor is better by a mile. Composer 1 is sooooo good and fast. Gemini 3 was just slow and lazy. Composer 1 has no problem building out thousands of lines of code in minutes, while gemini 3 will half-ass a feature but make it look cool by opening and controlling the browser to verify itself!

I think gemini 3 is probably a good model for thinking / learning (like a general chatbot) but I will continue to use my cursor workflow that has been doing wonders for me.

Antigravity is a cool idea, just need better and faster models to pair with it.

It’s not better than Cursor, but it’s definitely on the same level already. The crazy part? They reached this point in such a short time.

What stood out to me the most:

• Speed → It’s unbelievably fast. Feels almost instant.

• Execution style → Unlike Cursor’s big monolithic actions, Anti-Gravity breaks things into small multi-step operations, completes them quickly, and keeps iterating.

• Product maturity → For something this new, they’ve already matched a surprising number of Cursor-like features.

• User experience → The way it thinks, resolves, and implements changes feels super fluid.

If this is Day 1, then the competition in AI coding tools is going to get very interesting.

Edit — the above text itself was generated by Anti-Gravity. I used up my quota completely, and now it’s rate-limited.