Eraser vs Gamma
A side-by-side comparison of Eraser and Gamma, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Eraser | Gamma |
|---|---|---|
| Category (differs) | Design | Assistant |
| Pricing | FREEMIUM | FREEMIUM |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Deployment | Cloud | Cloud |
| Platforms (differs) | Web, VS Code extension, API | Web, API |
| Model support (differs) | Single model (proprietary) | Multi-model |
| Vendor (differs) | Eraser | Gamma |
The honest brief
Eraser
Generates diagrams as editable code, not static images, so engineers can version, diff, and refine architecture diagrams like source.
- Diagrams from code or natural language
- Diagram-as-code is versionable and editable
- GitHub sync; Notion/Confluence embeds
- Free plan plus VS Code extension
- Free plan caps files and AI credits
- Aimed at technical diagrams, not general design
- AI credits metered on every plan
Gamma
One prompt yields editable decks, docs, and full websites — not just slides like AI deck-only tools.
- Generates decks, docs, and websites from one prompt
- Surprisingly capable free tier
- Real-time collaboration like Google Docs
- Imports and restructures PDFs and decks
- Generate API for programmatic output
- Card-based layout limits free element positioning
- PowerPoint export reads like a static doc
- Brand kit is per-deck, not global
- Template and design variety is limited