Saturday, 5th July 2025
Cursor: Clarifying Our Pricing. Cursor changed their pricing plan on June 16th, introducing a new $200/month Ultra plan with "20x more usage than Pro" and switching their $20/month Pro plan from "request limits to compute limits".
This confused a lot of people. Here's Cursor's attempt at clarifying things:
Cursor uses a combination of our custom models, as well as models from providers like OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and xAI. For external models, we previously charged based on the number of requests made. There was a limit of 500 requests per month, with Sonnet models costing two requests.
New models can spend more tokens per request on longer-horizon tasks. Though most users' costs have stayed fairly constant, the hardest requests cost an order of magnitude more than simple ones. API-based pricing is the best way to reflect that.
I think I understand what they're saying there. They used to allow you 500 requests per month, but those requests could be made against any model and, crucially, a single request could trigger a variable amount of token spend.
Modern LLMs can have dramatically different prices, so one of those 500 requests with a large context query against an expensive model could cost a great deal more than a single request with a shorter context against something less expensive.
I imagine they were losing money on some of their more savvy users, who may have been using prompting techniques that sent a larger volume of tokens through each one of those precious 500 requests.
The new billing switched to passing on the expense of those tokens directly, with a $20 included budget followed by overage charges for tokens beyond that.
It sounds like a lot of people, used to the previous model where their access would be cut off after 500 requests, got caught out by this and racked up a substantial bill!
To cursor's credit, they're offering usage refunds to "those with unexpected usage between June 16 and July 4."
I think this highlights a few interesting trends.
Firstly, the era of VC-subsidized tokens may be coming to an end, especially for products like Cursor which are way past demonstrating product-market fit.
Secondly, that $200/month plan for 20x the usage of the $20/month plan is an emerging pattern: Anthropic offers the exact same deal for Claude Code, with the same 10x price for 20x usage multiplier.
Professional software engineers may be able to justify one $200/month subscription, but I expect most will be unable to justify two. The pricing here becomes a significant form of lock-in - once you've picked your $200/month coding assistant you are less likely to evaluate the alternatives.
Serving 200 million requests per day with a cgi-bin (via) Jake Gold tests how well 90s-era CGI works today, using a Go + SQLite CGI program running on a 16-thread AMD 3700X.
Using CGI on modest hardware, it’s possible to serve 2400+ requests per second or 200M+ requests per day.
I got my start in web development with CGI back in the late 1990s - I was a huge fan of NewsPro, which was effectively a weblog system before anyone knew what a weblog was.
CGI works by starting, executing and terminating a process for every incoming request. The nascent web community quickly learned that this was a bad idea, and invented technologies like PHP and FastCGI to help avoid that extra overhead and keep code resident in-memory instead.
This lesson ended up baked into my brain, and I spent the next twenty years convinced that you should never execute a full process as part of serving a web page.
Of course, computers in those two decades got a lot faster. I finally overcame that twenty-year core belief in 2020, when I built datasette-ripgrep, a Datasette plugin that shells out to the lightning fast ripgrep CLI tool (written in Rust) to execute searches. It worked great!
As was pointed out on Hacker News, part of CGI's problem back then was that we were writing web scripts in languages like Perl, Python and Java which had not been designed for lightning fast startup speeds. Using Go and Rust today helps make CGI-style requests a whole lot more effective.
Jake notes that CGI-style request handling is actually a great way to take advantage of multiple CPU cores:
These days, we have servers with 384 CPU threads. Even a small VM can have 16 CPUs. The CPUs and memory are much faster as well.
Most importantly, CGI programs, because they run as separate processes, are excellent at taking advantage of many CPUs!
Maybe we should start coding web applications like it's 1998, albeit with Go and Rust!
To clarify, I don't think most people should do this. I just think it's interesting that it's not as bad an idea as it was ~25 years ago.