Claude vs ChatGPT vs Cursor: Which AI Tool for Which Task?

You've got Claude open in one tab, ChatGPT in another, and Cursor running in your IDE. You stare at all three, wondering: "Which one should I actually use for this?"

After using all three tools daily for the past year—and burning through more quota than I'd like to admit figuring this out—I've developed a clear mental model for when to use each.

Here's the practical guide I wish I'd had when I started.

The Quick Answer: A Decision Matrix

Before we dive deep, here's the cheat sheet:

Task	Best Tool	Why
Writing code in an editor	Cursor	Native IDE integration, sees your full codebase
Code review/debugging	Claude	Best at understanding complex logic, longer context
Explaining concepts	ChatGPT or Claude	Both excellent, personal preference
Long-form writing	Claude	More natural prose, better at maintaining voice
Quick questions	ChatGPT	Faster responses, good for simple lookups
Research with citations	ChatGPT	Built-in web browsing, source links
Image generation	ChatGPT	DALL-E integration (Claude has no image gen)
Complex multi-file refactoring	Cursor	Codebase-aware suggestions
API/automation	Claude API or OpenAI API	Depends on your use case

Now let's break down why this is the case.

Claude: The Deep Thinker

Best for: Complex reasoning, code review, long-form writing, nuanced tasks

Claude (specifically Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Claude 3 Opus) excels when you need genuine understanding rather than pattern matching.

Where Claude Shines

1. Code Review and Debugging

Claude is remarkably good at reading a chunk of code and explaining:

• What it actually does (not just what it claims to do)
• Subtle bugs hiding in the logic
• Security vulnerabilities
• Performance implications

Example prompt that works great with Claude:

Here's my authentication middleware. Review it for:
1. Security vulnerabilities
2. Edge cases I might have missed
3. Ways to simplify the logic

[paste code]

Claude will often catch things like "this JWT validation doesn't check expiration" or "this error handler leaks information in production" that other models miss.

For more efficient code review prompts, check out our prompt templates that save 50% of your quota.

2. Understanding Complex Codebases

Claude's 200K token context window means you can paste entire files (or multiple files) and ask questions about how they interact:

Here are three files from my project:
- auth.ts (handles login)
- middleware.ts (route protection)  
- session.ts (session management)

How does the authentication flow work end-to-end?
Where might a session hijacking attack succeed?

ChatGPT often loses track of details in complex multi-file contexts. Claude maintains coherence.

3. Long-Form Writing

Claude produces more natural prose. Its writing feels less "AI-ish"—fewer clichés, better paragraph transitions, more varied sentence structure.

If you're writing documentation, blog posts, or technical guides, Claude typically needs less editing.

4. Following Complex Instructions

Claude is better at following detailed, multi-step instructions. You can give it a complex style guide or specification, and it actually follows it consistently throughout its response.

Anthropic has excellent documentation on prompt engineering best practices if you want to get more out of Claude.

Where Claude Falls Short

• No image generation — Can't create images like ChatGPT/DALL-E
• No web browsing — Can't look up current information
• Slower — Responses take longer than ChatGPT (especially Opus)
• Stricter limits — Pro users hit the 5-hour cap more easily

Best Claude Workflows

1. Morning code review: Paste yesterday's PR and ask for a thorough review
2. Architecture discussions: Describe your system and ask for feedback
3. Documentation writing: Draft docs in Claude, then refine
4. Complex debugging: When you're stuck, dump the whole context to Claude

ChatGPT: The Swiss Army Knife

Best for: Quick questions, research, multimodal tasks, general productivity

GPT-4o is fast, capable, and has the broadest feature set. It's the "good at everything, best at some things" option.

Where ChatGPT Shines

1. Speed and Responsiveness

ChatGPT (especially GPT-4o) is noticeably faster than Claude. For quick lookups, simple code snippets, or brainstorming, the speed difference matters.

2. Web Browsing and Research

ChatGPT Plus includes web browsing. You can ask:

• "What's the latest version of React?"
• "Summarize this article: [URL]"
• "What are developers saying about the new TypeScript release?"

Claude can't browse the web. For anything requiring current information, ChatGPT wins by default.

3. Image Generation

DALL-E integration means you can:

• Generate placeholder images for projects
• Create diagrams and illustrations
• Visualise concepts

Example:

Create a simple architecture diagram showing a React frontend 
connecting to a Node.js API, which connects to PostgreSQL. 
Use a clean, minimal style.

4. Code Interpreter and Data Analysis

ChatGPT can actually run Python code on uploaded files. Need to:

• Analyse a CSV?
• Generate charts from data?
• Process a JSON file?

Upload it and ask. Claude can write the code but can't execute it.

5. Custom GPTs and Plugins

If you've built custom GPTs for your workflow (or use popular ones), that's ecosystem lock-in. No equivalent in Claude.

OpenAI has a solid prompt engineering guide with specific tips for getting better results from their models.

Where ChatGPT Falls Short

• Occasionally sycophantic — Tends to agree with you too readily
• Weaker on nuance — Complex logic sometimes gets oversimplified
• Less natural writing — Prose can feel more templated
• Context limitations — 128K tokens vs Claude's 200K

Best ChatGPT Workflows

1. Quick research: "What's the difference between useEffect and useLayoutEffect?"
2. Current events: "What's new in Node 22?"
3. Image needs: Creating diagrams, mockups, placeholders
4. Data processing: Upload CSV, ask for analysis
5. General brainstorming: Rapid-fire ideas for a new feature

Cursor: The Coding Specialist

Best for: Writing code in your editor, codebase-aware completions, refactoring

Cursor is different from Claude and ChatGPT—it's an AI-native code editor (a VS Code fork) rather than a chat interface. This distinction is crucial.

Where Cursor Shines

1. Contextual Awareness

Cursor sees your entire project. When you ask it to write code, it knows:

• Your file structure
• Your imports and dependencies
• Your coding style from existing files
• Your types and interfaces

This means completions actually match your codebase rather than generic patterns.

Example: In a React project using your custom useAuth hook, Cursor will use that hook. Claude or ChatGPT would invent their own auth pattern.

2. Inline Editing

Hit Cmd+K in Cursor and describe what you want. It modifies the code in place:

// Select a function, hit Cmd+K:
"Add error handling and retry logic with exponential backoff"

// Cursor rewrites the function inline

No copy-paste. No reformatting. Just... done.

3. Multi-File Awareness

Cursor's Composer mode can make changes across multiple files simultaneously:

"Add a new API endpoint for user preferences. 
Update the route file, create a controller, 
add the TypeScript types, and update the API client."

// Cursor creates/modifies 4 files in one go

Claude and ChatGPT can suggest multi-file changes, but you're copy-pasting each one. Cursor applies them.

4. Tab Completion That Actually Helps

Cursor's autocomplete is context-aware. It's not just syntax completion—it predicts what you're likely to write next based on your codebase patterns.

This alone saves hours per week versus traditional autocomplete.

Check out Cursor's rate limit documentation to understand how their fast/slow request system works.

Where Cursor Falls Short

• Not for non-coding tasks — Writing docs? Use Claude. Research? Use ChatGPT.
• IDE lock-in — You have to use their editor (though it's VS Code based)
• Quota can run out — "Slow" mode when you hit limits
• Less conversational — Better for commands than discussions

Best Cursor Workflows

1. Feature development: "Create a React component for user settings with form validation"
2. Refactoring: "Convert this class component to a functional component with hooks"
3. Bug fixes: "This test is failing because..." → Cursor fixes it
4. Boilerplate: "Add CRUD endpoints for the Product model"

Cursor vs Copilot: Which IDE Assistant?

Since both are IDE-integrated coding assistants, let's compare directly:

Feature	Cursor Pro	GitHub Copilot
Price	£18/month	£9/month
Completions	Claude + GPT models	GPT-4
Chat	Yes, powerful	Yes, improving
Multi-file edits	Yes (Composer)	Limited
Codebase context	Full project indexing	File-level mainly
IDE	Cursor (VS Code fork)	Any IDE with plugin

My take: Cursor is better for serious development work. Copilot is cheaper and works in your existing IDE. If you're switching editors anyway, go Cursor. If you love your current setup, Copilot is solid.

For a complete breakdown of costs across all these tools, see our true cost of AI tools analysis.

The Practical Multi-Tool Strategy

Here's how I actually use these tools together:

Morning Routine

1. Cursor for writing code during focused development blocks
2. Claude (in a side browser tab) for questions that need longer context or deeper analysis

During Development

• Simple syntax question: ChatGPT (fastest)
• "Why isn't this working?": Claude (paste error + context)
• "Write this function": Cursor (if in editor) or Claude (if planning)
• Code review before PR: Claude (thorough analysis)

Research Mode

• Learning new tech: ChatGPT (can browse docs and tutorials)
• Deep dive on architecture: Claude (better at nuanced trade-offs)
• Current best practices: ChatGPT (needs web access)

Writing Mode

• Documentation: Claude (better prose)
• README files: Claude (more natural)
• Quick commit messages: Cursor (one Cmd+K inline)

Cost Comparison: What You Actually Pay

Let's be real about pricing:

Tool	Plan	Monthly	What You Get
Claude Pro	Pro	£18	~150 msgs/5hr window, Projects
ChatGPT Plus	Plus	£18	GPT-4o, DALL-E, web browse, plugins
Cursor	Pro	£18	Unlimited slow, 500 fast requests
GitHub Copilot	Individual	£9	IDE completions + chat

Combinations that make sense:

• Budget (£18/mo): Cursor only — handles most coding needs
• Standard (£36/mo): Cursor + Claude — coding + deep analysis
• Full stack (£54/mo): Cursor + Claude + ChatGPT — complete coverage
• Alternative (£27/mo): Copilot + Claude — existing IDE + best chat

Understanding how each tool measures and limits usage is crucial for maximising value. Our guide on how AI rate limits actually work explains the token, message, and compute-based systems behind each service.

Which Should You Start With?

If you're only paying for one:

• Primarily code: Cursor — the IDE integration is transformative
• Primarily writing/research: Claude — best quality output
• Need everything: ChatGPT — most versatile single tool

If you're paying for two:

• Cursor + Claude — Best combo for developers. Cursor for writing code, Claude for everything that needs thinking.

If you're paying for three... honestly ask yourself if you need all three. Most developers don't. You're probably paying for redundancy you rarely use.

Track Which Tools You Actually Use

Here's a challenge: over the next week, write down which AI tool you use for each task. You'll probably find:

• 80% of your usage is on 1-2 tools
• You have "backup" subscriptions you rarely touch
• Certain tasks always go to the same tool

This is exactly why we built QuotaMeter—to show you not just usage limits, but usage patterns. When you can see that you use Claude 50x more than ChatGPT, the "maybe I should cancel ChatGPT Plus" decision becomes obvious.

Bottom Line: The Right Tool for the Job

There's no single "best" AI tool. There's only the best tool for your task:

• Writing code in an editor: Cursor
• Understanding complex code: Claude
• Quick questions: ChatGPT
• Current information: ChatGPT
• Image generation: ChatGPT
• Long-form writing: Claude
• Multi-file refactoring: Cursor

Use the decision matrix at the top of this post. Pick 1-2 tools that cover your main use cases. Track your actual usage so you're not paying for tools gathering dust.

The developers who get the most from AI aren't using everything—they're using the right thing for each situation.

---

Want to track your usage across Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, and more? Get QuotaMeter — see all your AI tools in one dashboard. Know exactly what you're using and when limits reset. £4.99 one-time.