📐 Genspark AI vs. Gamma: Who builds it better?

Welcome to The Wireframe – your no-BS-breakdown of how AI tools actually perform when put to work.

Today’s matchup: Gamma vs. Genspark AI

We usually break down websites based on UX, copy, and design—but this week, we went hands-on.

Instead of just looking at the landing page claims, we ran both Gamma.app and Genspark.ai through a practical test: turning an email marketing guide into a shareable presentation.

Spoiler: these two tools serve different needs and depending on the type of presentation you're building, one clearly pulls ahead.

Let’s break it down.

Gamma — Your AI design partner for polished decks, docs, and landing pages.

✅ Instant clarity & sharp messaging
“Bring your ideas to life.” Gamma’s pitch is clean, tight, and benefit-focused. No decoding needed and speaks to their target audience: people who want extra design support on their presentations, fast.

✅ Live publishing built-in
Docs created in Gamma can be published as websites instantly. That’s a huge plus if you want a quick microsite, a pitch deck link, or a shareable resource without touching Webflow.

✅ Card-based UX that makes sense
Editing in Gamma feels natural, like Notion and Canva teamed up. No clunky toolbars, just easy-to-drag blocks and AI-powered layout suggestions.

✅ Designed for actual humans
The entire experience—from onboarding to export—is friendly. Bonus: the free version gives you full design functionality and publishing without an over the top watermark being slapped on the documents.

⚠️ Scope is tight (by design)
Gamma excels at docs, decks, and visual storytelling. But don’t expect heavy customization, app logic, or anything beyond basic layouts.

⚠️ AI-generated visuals still need polish
Built-in image generation is fine for rough drafts, but not always client-ready. You're better off uploading your own visuals if quality matters.

Genspark AI — The "Agentic Engine" for slide automation, AI research, and more

✅ Fast and surprisingly smart slide gen
Give it a longform doc, and Genspark will identify the key points and build a deck in under 2 minutes. Headers, layouts, bullets—it’s quick and efficient for rough draft slides.

✅ Multi-format AI playground
Slides, image studio, AI video gen, deep research—it’s all here. If Gamma is a boutique tool, Genspark is the full department store. Still, you’re going from I know exactly what I want to an overwhelming amount of tools.

✅ Markdown fans will feel at home
For more technical users, Genspark supports slide creation with Markdown, making it easier to template and customize programmatically.

⚠️ UI takes a second to click
Once you're inside, the dashboard is clean and functional. But the initial homepage, filled with newsfeed-like content—doesn’t immediately communicate what Genspark is or why you should care.

⚠️ Pricing gets murky
There’s a free plan, and you can export slides to PDFs or PPTs but no website publishing beyond that. Different tools also have different pricing, which can get confusing fast.

❌ Copy and branding feel unfinished
While Gamma markets itself like a product built for mainstream adoption, Genspark feels more like a builder’s sandbox—powerful, but not polished. Expect some friction unless you're already in the AI weeds.

Quick Takeaway

We created an email marketing lead magnet in Gamma—clean layout, easy to structure, and intuitive to edit inside the tool. Then we dropped that same content into Genspark’s AI Slides to see what it could do.

Here’s the outcome:

• Gamma gave us a polished, editable doc-turned-presentation with minimal friction. Great for when you already have your ideas down and just need a way to present them beautifully. Example here.

• Genspark, on the other hand, took longer to generate the slides, and its interface made it harder to tell what features were free vs. paid. The site’s functionality still feels early-stage, though it does bring something unique to the table: built-in AI research and summarization capabilities. Example here.

✅ Gamma wins for lead magnets, educational content, or anything that needs structure and visuals without too much fuss.
⚠️ Genspark may shine more when you're starting from scratch or want a pitch deck-style presentation built off minimal input.

If you're starting with a clear outline or doc: Go Gamma.
If you're trying to spin gold from a one-liner prompt: Genspark has potential—but still needs polish.

Next time you’re building a deck, try both (they're free) and see which one fits your workflow better.

Need a marketing partner that moves fast and actually gets it?

I run JX Creative, where it’s not the AI that makes the difference, but the marketer who actually knows how to use it.