Make (Integromat) vs Cursor
TL;DR — Quick Answer
Cursor wins this comparison with an overall score of 9.1/10 vs Make (Integromat)'s 8.7/10. Cursor leads on 3 of 5 scoring dimensions. For most users, Cursor is the better choice — but Make (Integromat) may suit specific workflows better.
Make (Integromat)
Visual automation for complex workflows
Cursor
The AI-first code editor
Score Comparison
| Dimension | Make (Integromat) | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| Ease of Use | 8.0 | 8.8 ✓ |
| Features | 9.1 | 9.4 ✓ |
| Value for Money | 9.3 ✓ | 8.7 |
| Performance | 8.8 | 9.2 ✓ |
| Support & Docs | 8.5 | 8.5 |
| Overall Score | 8.7 | 9.1 ✓ |
Pricing Comparison
Make (Integromat)
1,000 operations/month
$9/month (Core), $16/month (Pro)
Cursor
2-week trial
$20/month (Pro)
Make (Integromat) — Pros & Cons
- More flexible than Zapier
- Better value for money
- Visual scenario builder
- Strong data transformation
- Steeper learning curve
- Less intuitive for beginners
- Fewer integrations than Zapier
Cursor — Pros & Cons
- Codebase-aware AI assistance
- Multi-file editing capabilities
- VS Code compatibility
- Agentic coding features
- Requires subscription for full features
- Learning curve from VS Code
- Can be slow on large codebases
Our Verdict: Cursor Wins
After independent testing, Cursor earns the edge with an overall score of 9.1/10 compared to Make (Integromat)'s 8.7/10. Cursor wins on 3 of 5 dimensions including Ease of Use and Features.
That said, Make (Integromat) remains a strong choice if you prioritise Value for Money. Both tools have free tiers or trials — we recommend testing both before committing.
Make (Integromat) vs ChatGPT
Make (Integromat) vs Claude
Make (Integromat) vs Google Gemini
Make (Integromat) vs Grok