Gamma vs Tome

Gamma vs Tome in 2026: what’s the short answer?

As of June 19, 2026: Gamma is an active AI presentation/doc/site creator with public plan pricing, monthly AI credits, and exports (PDF, PPTX, PNG). The original Tome presentation product is not reliably reachable via the historical “tome.app” domain (returned 404 when checked on June 19, 2026), and the prominent current “Tome” site (mytome.com) describes an academic intelligence platform rather than a presentation editor.

What this means in practice: if your decision is about making AI-generated decks you can share/export, Gamma is the viable “Tome-like” option today. If you specifically want “Tome’s old card-based storytelling tool”, you may be comparing Gamma to a product that no longer exists in the same form.

How much do Gamma and Tome cost (and what are the limits) in 2026?

Gamma’s pricing and AI limits are explicitly published. For Tome’s original presentation product, current official pricing for that product is not verifiable from an official presentation-product pricing page as of June 19, 2026 (tome.app/pricing returned 404 when checked). So below, Gamma is fully quantified; Tome is marked as “not verifiable” for the discontinued presentation editor, and the currently accessible Tome pricing page (tomeapp.com/pricing) appears to be for a different subscription product (courses/membership), not slides.

What’s the real product difference: Gamma vs Tome-style storytelling?

Historically, people compared Gamma and Tome as “card-based, scrollable, story-first” tools that can also behave like slide decks. In 2026, the practical comparison is: Gamma is a card-based editor that can output presentations/docs/sites and export to standard formats; Tome’s original presentation editor may be unavailable, so you’re effectively choosing Gamma (or another tool) for that workflow.

What “card-based” means for your work

• You author in chunks (cards) instead of fixed slide masters.
• It’s faster for narrative docs and web-style decks, because you can rearrange sections without breaking a rigid slide grid.
• The tradeoff is export fidelity: when you export to PPTX/PDF, some styling can change depending on how the target software renders fonts/gradients (Gamma explicitly notes export reflects Present Mode and some gradients/fonts may render differently). Source: https://help.gamma.app/en/articles/8022861-what-s-the-easiest-way-to-export-my-gamma (accessed June 19, 2026).

Concrete example: one idea, two outputs

Example output you might want from a “Gamma vs Tome” tool: a product update deck you can present live and also send as a PDF. In Gamma, exports are explicitly supported as PDF, PNG, and PowerPoint (PPTX), with Google Slides supported by exporting PPTX and uploading to Google Slides (Source: https://help.gamma.app/en/articles/8022861-what-s-the-easiest-way-to-export-my-gamma, accessed June 19, 2026). If your buyer/client insists on editable PPTX, you should validate an export on a real sample deck before committing.

Can you export to PPTX/PDF (and does it stay editable)?

Gamma supports exporting to PDF, PNG, and PowerPoint (PPTX), and also describes a Google Slides workflow by exporting PPTX then uploading to Slides. Gamma also documents common export constraints (very long documents, large/numerous images, unstable networks) and notes that exported visuals reflect Present Mode and may render differently in third-party software.

Copy-and-do: export from Gamma in under 60 seconds

• Open your Gamma.
• Click Share (top right) or the three-dot menu (top right), then choose Export. (Source: https://help.gamma.app/en/articles/8022861-what-s-the-easiest-way-to-export-my-gamma, accessed June 19, 2026).
• Pick PDF, PNG, or PowerPoint (PPTX).
• Download the file; Gamma also sends a copy by email per the help article.
• If the export fails: split a very long Gamma into smaller sections, and reduce/compress images (Gamma lists long length and large/numerous images as common failure causes).

If you used Tome, how do you move that workflow to Gamma?

Because the original Tome presentation editor is not reliably reachable on the historical domain in June 2026 (tome.app/pricing returned 404 when checked on June 19, 2026), your practical goal is to migrate your “Tome-style” storytelling workflow: prompt → cards → visuals → share/export. Here’s a copy-and-do playbook using only documented Gamma capabilities and constraints.

Migration checklist (copy and paste into your task tracker)

• Inventory your top 3 recurring deck types (e.g., sales pitch, product update, investor memo) and collect one representative example each.
• For each deck type, define a standard card outline (8–14 cards) so you can regenerate reliably.
• Decide your deliverable format upfront: PDF for approval, PPTX only if you must edit post-export.
• Pick a Gamma plan based on credits: if you routinely do full “Create with AI” generations, budget 40 credits per generated Gamma plus 5 credits per AI-added card and 10 credits per image prompt (Source: https://help.gamma.app/en/articles/7834324-how-do-credits-work-in-gamma, accessed June 19, 2026).
• Run one full pilot: generate, edit, export, then open the export in the tool your stakeholders use (PowerPoint or Google Slides) and note what changes.

Concrete credit math example (so you can estimate cost)

Example: you generate one deck via “Create with AI” (40 credits), then add 6 additional cards via “Add card with AI” (6 × 5 = 30 credits), and generate 8 images (8 × 10 = 80 credits). Total = 150 credits for that project. Source for per-action costs: https://help.gamma.app/en/articles/7834324-how-do-credits-work-in-gamma (accessed June 19, 2026).

Want a clean “Gamma vs Tome” comparison deck you can reuse? Do it with AnyGen

If your real need behind “gamma vs tome” is a clear, client-ready comparison deck (pricing, exports, status, and a recommendation for your situation), AnyGen helps by generating an immediately presentable outline plus copy-ready tables and decision matrices you can drop into your preferred editor. The goal is not to “pick sides” blindly, but to produce a factual, dated (June 2026) comparison you can present internally or send to a stakeholder.

Copy-and-do: build a comparison deck in 10 minutes

1. Decide your audience: “team choosing a deck tool” vs “client asking why we switched from Tome”.
2. Choose your deliverable: a one-page summary + a 6–10 slide deck.
3. Use this prompt verbatim in AnyGen: “Create a Gamma vs Tome comparison (as of June 19, 2026). Include Gamma’s official pricing and credit costs with sources. For Tome, state what is and isn’t verifiable today, including that tome.app/pricing returns 404 and mytome.com describes a different product category. Include an export workflow slide and a migration checklist slide.”
4. Replace the example scenario slide with your own situation (e.g., “sales deck weekly”, “investor update monthly”, “needs PPTX editability”).
5. Share internally and update quarterly by re-checking the official Gamma pricing/help pages.

So which should you choose: Gamma or Tome (for your use case)?

In June 2026, the decision is less “Gamma vs Tome features” and more “Gamma vs an unavailable (or transformed) product.” Use the matrix below to choose based on your real constraints: can you still access Tome, do you need exports, and do you need published pricing and support docs?

Frequently asked questions