AI presentation tools: what they actually cost in 2026
Three vendors, priced from their own pages on 25 August 2026. Two of them bill in a unit they invented, and only one publishes what that unit buys.
Every plan, to scale
Monthly equivalent, annual billing where the vendor publishes one. The line is the budget most people arrive with.
Read from gamma.app/pricing, plusai.com/pricing and beautiful.ai/pricing on 25 August 2026.
The full plan table, including annual and monthly rates
| Tool | Plan | Billed annually | Billed monthly | AI allowance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gamma | Free | $0 | $0 | 400 credits at signup |
| Gamma | Plus | $9 /seat/mo ($108/yr) | not published as a monthly rate | 1,000 credits/mo |
| Gamma | Pro | $18 /seat/mo ($216/yr) | not published as a monthly rate | 4,000 credits/mo |
| Gamma | Ultra | $90 /seat/mo ($1,080/yr) | not published as a monthly rate | 20,000 credits/mo |
| Plus AI | Basic | $10 /user/mo | $15 /user/mo | 1,500 credits/mo |
| Plus AI | Pro | $20 /user/mo | $25 /user/mo | 3,000 credits/mo |
| Beautiful.ai | Pro (individual) | $14.50 /mo | not published on the page | Unlimited AI generation |
| Beautiful.ai | Teams (2-20 seats) | annual rate offered | $40 /user/mo | Unlimited AI generation |
The number you are billed in
Gamma and Plus AI both meter AI usage in credits. Only one of them publishes what a credit buys, which means only one of these allowances can be turned into work before you pay.
Plus AI
÷ 40 to 170 per task
Gamma
÷ not published
The two allowances are not comparable. Plus AI's 1,500 and Gamma's 1,000 are different units wearing the same word, and no amount of table formatting fixes that. A comparison that puts them in adjacent columns is inviting a subtraction that means nothing.
Why the tiers are not proportional either
Gamma's paid tiers run $9, $18 and $90 a seat while the allowance runs 1,000, 4,000 and 20,000. Price rises 10x across that range and allowance rises 20x, so cost per credit falls sharply as you climb. If your usage is genuinely high the expensive plan is the cheap one per unit of work. If it is not, you are buying headroom. Without a published exchange rate you cannot tell which of those you are doing, which is the practical cost of an undefined unit.
Which one, in one line
The deciding attribute is different in each case, so it is the thing named first.
Exports PPTX, Google Slides, PDF and PNG on the free plan. You generate here and take the file out.
Runs inside Google Slides and PowerPoint as an add-in. The deck never leaves the tool your colleagues already have open.
Unlimited AI generation, no allowance to run down. No free tier: 14-day trial, then it starts.
"Works with PowerPoint" is two different architectures
An exported .pptx is a one-way conversion that loses whatever the source tool did natively. An add-in keeps the file authoritative in its original format and edits it in place. If your review cycle involves someone who will open the file in PowerPoint and change it, that difference is worth more than the $1 a month between the two entry plans.
Beautiful.ai sells the opposite trade: no meter and no free tier. Its Pro plan lists unlimited AI content generation, AI image generation, an AI writing assistant, AI language translation, over 300 Smart Slide layouts with auto-formatting, a custom theme builder and dynamic data visualisations. The Teams jump is the number to watch: an individual Pro seat at $14.50 becomes $40 per user on Teams, a 2.8x increase that triggers at two seats. A two-person team pays $80 a month at Beautiful.ai where two Gamma Plus seats cost $18.
One tool on every shortlist no longer serves a website
$ curl -I https://tome.app/pricing HTTP/2 404 404: NOT_FOUND Code: DEPLOYMENT_NOT_FOUND checked 25 Aug 2026
Root and /pricing, apex and www, from a browser and from a script. tome.com did not respond at all. The domain still resolves in DNS; the site behind it does not load. That is a statement about what those URLs returned on that date, not a claim about the company.
It is a useful reminder about how this category ages. A comparison written eighteen months ago can be entirely accurate about a product that no longer exists, which is why every figure here carries the date it was read.
Three we could not price
All three belong in this category and carry no price here. Their pricing pages did not serve readable content to our checks on 25 August 2026: bot protection, or JavaScript-only responses that return an empty document to anything that is not a browser.
We do not bypass bot protection and we do not publish a price we did not read. A rate quoted without that is a guess wearing a citation. If you need those three compared, open them in a browser; they display normally to a human.
How to check this, and when it expires
Every price, allowance and plan name above is linked to the vendor's own pricing page and was read on that date. Treat them as accurate then and no later. If a figure here no longer matches the vendor's page, the vendor's page is right and this one is stale.
Two things that change more quietly than prices do
First, credit allowances. A vendor that halves an allowance has raised your effective cost without touching the number on the pricing page, and nobody writes a blog post about it. Second, annual and monthly rates are not always both published. Gamma shows per-seat monthly figures under an annual-billing toggle and Beautiful.ai shows an annual rate for individuals and a monthly rate for teams, so a straight monthly-versus-monthly comparison of this category is not available from the pages themselves.
If a figure here no longer matches the vendor's own page, the vendor's page is right and this one is stale. That is what the review date at the top is for.