I just wrapped up a two-week sprint experimenting with three AI coding assistants: Cursor, IntelliJ’s AI Assistant, and ChatGPT.
The goal wasn’t just to play with toys. I wanted to push each tool hard enough to see its quirks, expose my own biases, and understand what I actually value in web developement.
Spoiler: each one feels like a different kind of developer archetype.
Cursor: The Reckless Junior Dev
Cursor is that overcaffeinated intern who shows up at 7am, cranks out 500 lines of code by lunch, and proudly says, “Done!”
You smile, then notice the app now requires three blockchain nodes and a pet llama to run.
It’s brilliant. It’s reckless. It’s fast. But without constant adult supervision, it will happily lead you into architectural clown town.
And because Cursor runs on a token model, its real job is to spend your quota faster than a teenager with their first credit card.
Still—when you just want to see something alive on screen, Cursor is pure majic.
IntelliJ AI Assistant: The Grizzled Senior Dev
If Cursor is the excitable intern, IntelliJ’s AI is the scarred veteran who leans back in their chair, takes a slow sip of coffe, and says:
“You don’t want to do that. It’ll create security holes.”
It’s cautious. Sometimes maddeningly cautious. But also usually right.
JetBrains runs this as an unlimited subscription, which basically means: their business model rewards them for not overusing GPU cycles. Translation? IntelliJ is incentivized to say no more than yes.
It’s like pair programming with Gandalf. Slow to action. But when it speaks, you listen.
ChatGPT: The Common-Sense Thought Partner
ChatGPT lands in the middle.
It’s not as deeply wired into your codebase as Cursor or IntelliJ, but when it writes code, it’s clear, elegant, and refreshingly sane. After decades of coding, I can tell you—that clarity is rare.
Where ChatGPT shines is in conversation. You can say:
“Cursor did this. Is that the right way, or is there a simpler path?”
And it won’t just fix syntax. It’ll help you think.
The business model is split: chat is subscription, agents are token-based. For now, I treat it less like an IDE plug-in and more like a brilliant colleague I can ping for quick, no-ego advice.
My Workflow After Two Weeks
Here’s how I’m blending the three:
- Start with Cursor → prototype fast, let it run wild, get the MVP on its feet.
- Hand it to IntelliJ → refactor, harden, and let the wise dev remove the landmines.
- Keep ChatGPT in the loop → sense-check ideas, simplify solutions, and sanity-test business logic.
It’s basically an AI dev team:
- Cursor = Hustling junior.
- IntelliJ = Cautious senior.
- ChatGPT = Strategist in the corner, raising an eyebrow when things get wierd.
And me? I’m still the architect, deciding what actually ships.
Final Thought
These two weeks taught me AI isn’t here to replace developers. It’s here to mirror them. Cursor shows me speed. IntelliJ shows me caution. ChatGPT shows me clarity.
The real skill is mixing them into a workflow that reflects my values as a builder.
That’s not just AI coding—it’s AI collaboration.
What’s Next
Next step: I’m going to stress-test this setup on a real project. Not a toy app. A production feature with deadlines, users, and the kind of edge cases that don’t show up in demos.
That’s when I’ll know if this trio is a lasting workflow—or just a brilliant two-week fling.
