There is a battle to have the AI ​​model that programs best. And a good, pretty and very cheap rival has appeared in it: Cursor

Cursor has introduced Composer 2.5a generative AI model specifically intended for one thing: programming well. How good? Well, according to this startup, it does it as well as the best models of the moment, Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT 5.5, but it also does it for a lower cost. The challenge is striking not only because of what it means for Cursor, but because of how they have created that model: it turns out that it is based on a Chinese AI model. AI models specialized in one thing. While OpenAI and Anthropic try to develop general-purpose models—they do a lot of things really well— Cursor you have decided to focus on a specific task. The AI ​​startup has created an AI model specialized in programming, and has done so by arguing that a billion parameters are not necessary to compete with the best. Devoting yourself to a single thing allows you to not only gain efficiency, but also costs. This is not a decathlete, but a specialist in the 200 m event, so to speak. As good as GPT-5.5 or Claude Opus 4.7? That’s what they say in Cursor, because according to their tests with several specific programming benchmarks, the performance is on par with those two models that today are the great references both in programming and in other areas. And much cheaper. These results are also especially interesting when we add the cost factor. The average cost per task in the CursorBench 3.1 benchmark showed that Composer 2.5 managed to solve almost 65% of all tests for a cost of just $0.3. Opus 4.7 max and GPT-5.5 xhigh managed to reach that 65%, but at much higher costs: just over 4 dollars in the case of GPT, and 11 dollars in the case of Opus. The difference is abysmal. He API access price demonstrates the differences: 0.5 dollars per million input tokens 2.5 dollars per million output tokens, when Claude Opus 4.7 is 5/25 and that of GPT-5.5 is 5/30 respectively. Textual feedback. Unlike models that only learn from the final result, Composer 2.5 has been trained with a reinforcement learning technique (Reinforcement Learning) that allows us to offer clues about what is happening if errors are being made. This allows the model to recalibrate and act as a transparent teacher. One that also corrects word by word as it solves the exercise, not just when seeing the final result. 85% of the training budget has been dedicated exclusively to reinforcement learning, calibrating the model not for chat, but to execute code refactorings or fix bugs in real time. A model “born” in China. Those responsible for Cursor themselves have explained that Composer 2.5—like its predecessor, Composer 2launched at the end of March—is a model derived from Kimi K2.5, the AI ​​model of the Chinese startup Moonshot. Although that is the basis, already in Composer 2 the training and post-training tasks manage to improve the behavior in a very notable way in programming benchmarks and also in others such as Terminal Bench that evaluate the agentic behavior of these models. Cursor gets older. This startup became famous for creating a programming AI agent that was a pioneer in that fever we live for vibecoding. The user experience is no longer that of programming, as in traditional IDEs (Integrated Development Environments), but rather that of directing the machine to program it for you. Composer 2.5 doesn’t just program: it understands the structure and relationships between files, and turns Cursor into a much more competitive AI company, because it no longer depends on being able to work with Anthropic or OpenAI models, for example. Having both the AI ​​agent and the model processing everything makes it a much more competitive solution. Elon Musk has Cursor in his sights. Cursor’s good performance has led to growing interest in buying this company even before it becomes too big. Elon Musk knows this well and Grok, xAI’s model, is not so popular in the programming field. In April we learned that SpaceX had reached an agreement that gives you the option to buy Cursor for 60,000 million dollars. It would be a promising deal for both, because Composer 2.5 has already used Colossus’ infrastructure to train, and xAI could thus try to gain market share in the juicy enterprise sector. In Xataka | Elon Musk knows that TSMC is overwhelmed: Terafab is his idea to completely change the global chip industry

The mouse cursor has hardly changed for half a century. Google just tried to make that no longer the case

Google DeepMind has published the principles and demos of Magic Pointera mouse pointer powered by Gemini who understands what you are pointing out and why. Without writing anything. Just pointing. Why is it important. The chatbot as the main interface has been the dominant model in AI for two years: you open a window, write and you get a response. Magic Pointer proposes the opposite: the AI ​​moves with you around the screen, reads what is in front of you and acts without you explaining the context. If it works as promised, the text box is no longer the gateway to AI. The logic behind the project is that the problem with current AI is not its capacity, but the friction to use it. Every time you want to ask a model for something, you have to drag your world into it: open a window, paste text, explain the context from scratch, etc. Magic Pointer reverses that flow: the AI ​​goes where the cursor is. In detail. The system captures visual and semantic context around the pointer. You indicate a date in an email and Gemini suggests creating an event. You select two images, a sofa and your living room, and the model composes them. You hover over a table and you can request a graph without opening any more apps. The objective is to replace the prompts long by what DeepMind calls “natural shorthand”: point out something, say what you want, and have the system fill in the gaps. There are live demos at Google AI Studio and the system now reaches Chrome. In autumn it will land in Googlebookthe new Google laptop with Acer, Asus, Dell, HP and Lenovo as manufacturers. Between the lines. We are looking at three ways to put AI in a computer: Apple integrates it within each application. Microsoft puts Copilot on a side panel. Google puts Gemini inside the pointing device itself: it is not in the background, it is the cursor, it is the widgetis the interface between the user and the machine. That last one is a philosophical bet. And it has implications for the chatbot model: if the cursor acts as a contextual agent, the chat window loses its monopoly as an entry point. Yes, but. Googlebook arrives in autumn as a premium product, with no announced price yet. The Android ecosystem on the desktop remains the weak flank: if developers do not build native apps for the big screen, the Magic Pointer points to a world that does not yet exist. And in any market where Gemini is restricted by regulations, the entire proposition becomes empty. In Xataka | The AI ​​industry already knows how to make more money. Just use the fear strategy Featured image | Google

Elon Musk’s AI does not have its own Claude Code, but they already have a solution for that: buy Cursor

SpaceX, Elon Musk’s aerospace company, Indian on Wednesday that he had reached an agreement with AI startup Cursor. According to this agreement, this company could be acquired for 60,000 million dollars. If everything is confirmed, xAI will finally have a programming AI agent with which to compete. Claude Code, Codex or Gemini AI. Restructuring. Elon Musk posted a message on X in March in which claimed that “xAI was not created the right way initially, so it’s rebuilding from the ground up.” The company’s trajectory has been erratic and most of its original founders ended up leaving the company in recent months, but for that restructuring Musk hired Andrew Milich and Jason Ginsberg, two of the co-founders of Cursor. And that has been the trigger for this agreement. Cursor’s rating skyrocketed. By November 2025, Cursor was the undisputed leader in the programming AI agent segment, with $3.4 billion in funding and a fantastic reputation among developers. It had reached $100 million in annual recurring revenue in less than two years, a figure that few startups of its generation can aspire to. The Claude Code earthquake. The arrival of Claude Code changed everything thanks to his extraordinary behavior and its integration with Anthropic models, and while OpenAI also promoted Codex and the era of vibe-coding made all these tools gain more strength than ever. However, for Cursor these launches were problematic because its competitors could work directly with companies because they had something that Cursor did not: computing capacity. Cursor needed an ally. In the statement of the agreement, those responsible for Cursor they explain that the lack of access to computing power to train their own AI models had been a major bottleneck for its growth. Both Anthropic and OpenAI have access to several present and future GW of compute thanks to their agreements with hyperscalers (Amazon, Google, Microsoft). But no matter how good Cursor was, it was competing with giants with many more resources. The agreement with SpaceX gives it access to xAI’s AI supercomputer, which is precisely perfect for training LLMs and which according to its managers allows them to “drastically scale the intelligence of our models”: But xAI too. On the other side of the agreement there is also another winner. xAI have their Colossus supercomputing cluster, access to SpaceX resources (of which it is part) and a significant base of users (and their data) thanks to Grok. What it does not have is a product that competes with Claude Code or Codex, and attempts to develop it have been unsuccessful. Buying Cursor solves that problem at once: instead of working on building a product for years while its competitors continue to advance, xAI directly integrates the team that already had that product and also adds the users who were already using Cursor. Will it be enough? The question this agreement must answer is whether it is enough to put xAI on the real map of artificial intelligence. The company has a minor presence in this market despite the efforts of Elon Musk, and although it will now have a product respected and valued by users, it will be interesting if that is enough to compete with its rivals in this area. The IPO as a contextual framework. SpaceX has been preparing to go public for months, and it is expected that this will be one of the largest Public Sale Offers (IPO) of history. Acquiring Cursor before or after that deal has clear financial implications because SpaceX has two options. You can buy Cursor for $60 billion, or simply pay $10 billion for a close collaboration agreement that does not include the acquisition. SpaceX will make that decision before the end of the year, but this agreement seems to suit both it and Cursor very well. Image | Gage Skidmore In Xataka | Elon Musk knows that TSMC is overwhelmed: Terafab is his idea to completely change the global chip industry

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.