J’ai remplacé Claude Code par Grok 4.5 dans Cursor

J’ai remplacé Claude Code par Grok 4.5 dans Cursor

I replaced Claude Code with Grok 4.5 in Cursor

Title history
  • J’ai remplacé Claude Code par Grok 4.5 dans Cursor — observed on 20261110-0254 UTC (YouTube)
🎙 Pentiminax 👥 30K 📅 July 20, 2026 ⏱ 16 min 👁 811 📄 tutorial 🧭 2026-11-10
Available in: English (current) Français

Keywords

Grok 4.5CursorClaude CodeAI coding agentSymfony

Summary

In this video, the creator (Pentiminax) tests Grok 4.5, a new AI coding model from xAI, inside the Cursor IDE to see if it can replace Claude Code in his daily workflow. He first reviews the official benchmarks announced in the Grok 4.5 release: DeepSWE‑1.0, SWE‑Marathon, Terminal‑Bench 2.0, and SWE‑Bench Pro. He notes that Grok 4.5 scores well on long‑running tasks and is significantly faster and cheaper than Claude Opus or Sonnet. He then shows the pricing comparison (2$/6$ per million tokens) and mentions that Grok Build, the terminal‑based agent, is open‑sourced and written in Rust. The core of the video is a live demonstration on a real GitHub issue from his open‑source project ‘ux‑datatables’ (a Symfony integration for DataTables). He uses Cursor with the ‘Plan’ mode to design the solution, then lets Grok implement the change across 20‑40 files. The result is a functional Tailwind‑based switch/badge rendering, which he verifies in the browser. He also explains that the whole task consumed only 1% of his Cursor usage, which is very efficient. The video concludes with a positive assessment, noting that while Claude Code remains his go‑to for complex tasks, Grok 4.5 offers a very good quality‑price ratio, especially for simpler issues.

202 words

Critical Evaluation

Value of the Information & Strength of the Argument

The video provides a genuine, hands‑on assessment of Grok 4.5, going beyond vendor claims. The author tests the model on a realistic development task with a well‑defined issue, giving concrete evidence of its capabilities and limitations. He explains the benchmarking pitfalls, such as the difference between model-only and model+agent evaluations, and highlights the cost savings as a major advantage. The argumentation is clear and structured: he compares official benchmarks, analyses the pricing, shows the setup process, and then demonstrates a complete workflow from planning to pull request. His personal workflow (using multiple AIs interchangeably) adds practical context. However, the evaluation is subjective and covers only one type of task (a moderately simple front‑end change); more demanding projects might reveal different results. The video would be stronger with a more rigorous methodology, e.g., comparing multiple attempts or including error cases.

Scientific Rigor, Source Quality, Title Accuracy

The video relies primarily on the official xAI blog post for benchmarks and pricing, which are vendor‑provided and therefore not independent. The author cites the blog and the Grok Build website but does not point to third‑party evaluations. The open‑source code is the author’s own project, available on GitHub, which reinforces transparency. The title accurately matches the content: it is indeed about replacing Claude Code with Grok 4.5 in Cursor. The reviewer’s own experience is consistent with the official claims, but the lack of external verification is a minor weakness. The video would benefit from citing independent benchmark analyses (e.g., from AI research groups) and addressing potential criticisms from the community. Overall, the source quality is acceptable for an opinion/test video, but not sufficient for a rigorous scientific assessment.

283 words

Title / Content Match

The title accurately reflects the video: the author tests Grok 4.5 as a direct replacement for Claude Code in the Cursor IDE.

Quality & Reliability

7/10

The review is based on a real‑world test on an open‑source project, but the presented benchmarks come directly from the vendor's blog, introducing potential bias. The author is transparent about his subjective experience and usage costs.

Key Moments

Cited Sources

  • Grok 4.5 announcement on xAI — Official blog post presenting the new model, benchmarks, and features.
  • Grok Build — Official site for the open‑source terminal agent compatible with Grok models.
  • UX DataTables repository — The open‑source Symfony bundle used for the live test; the GitHub issue resolved in the video.

External References

Contribution & Novelties

The video offers a practical, real‑world evaluation of Grok 4.5 in a development environment, which is more convincing than raw benchmarks. The creator demonstrates a complete workflow – from planning to code review – on an actual open‑source issue, providing concrete evidence of the model’s strengths (speed, cost, correctness) and its integration with Cursor and existing tools. The highlight is the low resource consumption (1% of usage) and the ability to produce a mergeable pull request autonomously. This kind of hands‑on feedback is valuable for developers considering a switch, as it goes beyond synthetic tests.

Pour aller plus loin :

156 words

Radar Profile

The radar profile shows a well‑balanced video: a good amount of information (8/10) with accurate practical details, moderate technical depth (7/10) suitable for intermediate developers, and a reliability score (7/10) reflecting a subjective but honest test. The quality of information (7/10) is slightly below the quantity because the data partially stems from vendor claims. Overall, the video is a strong practical addition to the AI coding discourse.

Reliability 7/10