Best AI Coding IDE? I Tested 5, Winner Shocked Me!

Summary

In this video, SJ compares five major AI-powered IDEs used for coding, after spending 30 days testing them. The platforms evaluated are Cursor, Wind Surf, Aid, Bolt, and Repet. Each tool was tested on key metrics such as code generation accuracy, natural language understanding, multi-file editing capabilities, development speed, and deployment ease. While Cursor impressed with its agent mode and flexibility, Wind Surf offered better multi-file handling. Ultimately, Bolt emerged as the top choice due to its speed, functionality, and seamless deployment process, while Aid and Repet fell short in terms of performance and usability.

Takeaways

• 😀 The video compares five major AI IDEs: Cursor, Wind Surf, Aid, Bolt, and Repet, based on a 30-day testing period.
• 😀 The focus is on building a trading bot, with five key stages: initial project setup, API connection, trading strategy, front-end, and deployment.
• 😀 Code generation accuracy is the most important metric for evaluating AI IDEs, followed by natural language understanding and multifile editing capabilities.
• 😀 Development speed is a critical factor, with the goal of building a prototype in a day instead of weeks or months.
• 😀 Cursor is praised for being agentic (autonomously executing tasks), but criticized for its slower performance and subscription limitations.
• 😀 Wind Surf, while capable of multifile editing, suffers from speed issues and unexpected errors, leading to a lower score than Cursor.
• 😀 Aid operates in the cloud, automatically creating pull requests based on GitHub issues, but lacks the visibility and control that other IDEs provide, earning it a C+.
• 😀 Bolt stands out as the fastest and most efficient AI IDE, with full-stack capabilities, fast development, and a user-friendly cloud interface, earning an A+.
• 😀 Repet, though popular, has issues with slow performance and errors, resulting in a disappointing experience and the lowest score among the five IDEs.
• 😀 Overall, Bolt is deemed the best AI IDE due to its speed, functionality, and successful final product, while Cursor and Wind Surf are good but not as efficient.

Q & A

What were the five key metrics used to test the AI code editors?

The five key metrics used to test the AI code editors were: 1) Code generation accuracy, 2) Natural language understanding, 3) Multifile editing capabilities, 4) Development speed, and 5) Ease of deployment.

What was the app that the testers decided to build in this video?

The app that the testers decided to build was a simple trading bot, which was used to evaluate the performance of each AI code editor.

Why is multifile editing a crucial feature for evaluating AI code editors?

Multifile editing is crucial because AI code editors should be capable of generating and editing multiple files simultaneously, eliminating the need for manual file handling and improving efficiency during development.

How does Bolt compare to other AI code editors in terms of development speed?

Bolt stood out for its fast development speed, as it was able to generate the required files and setup for the trading bot much quicker than the other AI editors tested.

What was the unique feature of Wind Surf that was compared to Cursor?

Wind Surf's unique feature was its multifile capabilities, as it was able to generate more files simultaneously compared to Cursor, though it was slower overall.

What is the downside of Wind Surf according to the tester?

The downside of Wind Surf was its slow speed in building the trading bot, unexpected errors, and the fact that it did not handle existing files well. Additionally, its high price compared to Cursor was a drawback.

Why was Aid given a C+ rating in the review?

Aid received a C+ rating because it operates as a cloud-based agent that makes pull requests to GitHub repositories but lacks key features like file visibility, version control, and the ability to interact with the code in a nuanced way.

What makes Bolt stand out among the AI code editors tested?

Bolt stood out for its quick development speed, agentic nature, real-time file visibility, and smooth integration with services like Supabase for database connectivity. It also provided an intuitive, fast deployment process, making it ideal for building MVPs.

How did Replet perform in the test, and what were its limitations?

Replet struggled with errors during the creation of the trading bot and was slower compared to the other AI editors. Despite this, it had a feature that allowed for creating checkpoints, which is useful for version control.

What is the primary benefit of using an AI code editor for building MVPs (Minimum Viable Products)?

The primary benefit is that AI code editors drastically reduce development time, enabling users to quickly turn an idea into a working prototype, which is essential for testing and iterating new concepts in a fast-paced environment.