You searched for gamma vs tome vs beautiful.ai. So did thousands of people this month. Here’s what none of those comparison articles mention: Tome shut down in April 2025. It’s been dead for eleven months.
Every result on the first page still lists it as an active tool. This one doesn’t. What you actually need is an honest Gamma vs Beautiful.ai breakdown — and a warning about what both tools get wrong.
What Happened to Tome (And What Former Users Lost)
Tome pivoted to an enterprise CRM called Lightfield on April 30, 2025. They laid off 20% of staff and deleted all user presentation data. No migration path. No export window. People lost their decks overnight.
What made Tome different was its cinematic approach — narrative-first design that felt more like storytelling than slide-building. Neither Gamma nor Beautiful.ai replaces that exactly.
If you were a Tome user: Gamma is the closest match for narrative-driven, docs-to-slides workflows. Beautiful.ai fills the brand-consistency gap Tome never prioritized. Neither will feel the same.
The bigger lesson: before you commit hours of work to any AI presentation tool, know what happens when they pivot. Both Gamma and Beautiful.ai are venture-backed. Both could change direction tomorrow. That’s not fearmongering — it’s what just happened to Tome’s entire user base.
Which raises the real question about the two tools still standing.
Does the AI Save Time or Create Cleanup Work?
Most comparisons list features side by side. The question that actually matters: after the AI generates your slides, how much time do you spend fixing them?
Gamma produces the fastest first draft I’ve seen. Paste a document, get slides in seconds. But export to PowerPoint and things break — fonts shift, layouts collapse, aspect ratios distort. If your final deliverable is a .pptx file someone else will edit, budget time for cleanup.
Beautiful.ai takes the opposite approach. Its smart templates auto-format everything, so output looks polished by default. The tradeoff: rigid layouts that fight you when you try to deviate. The AI constrains as much as it helps.
The honest framing: Gamma saves time on creation and costs you time on export. Beautiful.ai saves time on design polish and costs you time on customization. Every comparison that calls one “better” without specifying better for what is wasting your time — the same problem you see in AI tool comparisons across the board.
So which compromise actually costs less?
Gamma vs Beautiful.ai: The Numbers That Matter
Pricing
This is where the conversation gets real.
| Gamma Plus | Beautiful.ai Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Monthly | $10/mo | $45/mo |
| Annual | $8/mo | $12/mo |
| Free tier | 400 AI credits, Gamma badge | 14-day trial (credit card required) |
Gamma is 4.5x cheaper on monthly plans. Beautiful.ai closes the gap on annual billing, but that $45/month sticker shock is real — and there’s no true free plan to test before you hand over a credit card.
Output quality
Gamma’s slides feel more like interactive documents than polished presentations. That’s a strength for internal decks and async communication. It’s a weakness for investor pitches where visual polish signals credibility.
Beautiful.ai produces cleaner design out of the box. Its 60+ smart templates handle layout decisions you’d otherwise make manually. If brand consistency matters — same fonts, colors, spacing across every deck your team ships — this is where Beautiful.ai earns its premium.
Export fidelity
Both tools have export problems. This matters if your audience uses PowerPoint.
Gamma’s PowerPoint exports are the weaker of the two. Layout breaks, font substitutions, and aspect ratio issues are documented complaints. Beautiful.ai exports lose animations, and charts become static images. Neither gives you a clean .pptx.
If your workflow ends with “email the .pptx to someone who edits in PowerPoint,” neither tool solves this well. Consider Plus AI as a PowerPoint add-in or Canva Magic Design instead.
Customer service
Gamma sits at 1.7–2.5 on Trustpilot. Beautiful.ai has documented billing complaints — users charged after cancellation with slow refunds. Neither wins a customer service award.
This matters because these are subscription tools. Getting in is easy. Getting out — or getting help when something breaks — is where both fall short. Know this before you build your entire workflow around either one.
When to use each
Gamma: fast internal decks, doc-to-presentation conversion, API and automation workflows, budget-conscious teams. Skip it if your deliverable is a .pptx others will edit.
Beautiful.ai: brand-consistent enterprise decks, design-forward pitches, teams needing tight visual standards. Skip it if you want layout flexibility or aren’t buying annual.
For marketers weighing presentation tools against their broader AI stack, see the full breakdown of AI tools worth paying for.
So which one do I actually recommend?
The Bottom Line for 2026
You came here looking for a three-way comparison. Two of the three tools are still standing.
For most people, Gamma is the pick. At $8/month annual, the price difference is hard to argue with. The output is good enough for internal decks, client updates, and async presentations — and the free tier gives you 400 credits to test before paying anything.
Beautiful.ai earns its premium only if brand consistency is non-negotiable and you’re buying annual. At $45/month, you’re paying enterprise prices for a tool that still can’t export a clean .pptx.
If clean PowerPoint export is your hard requirement, neither tool is the answer. Most comparisons won’t tell you that.
Start with Gamma’s free tier. Build a few real presentations. If the output matches your standards, the $8/month upgrade is one of the cheaper AI subscriptions you’ll carry. That’s a lower-risk bet than Tome users got.