March 2025 dropped a bombshell. Tome—the AI presentation tool that raised $81 million and hit 20 million users—announced it was shutting down. By the end of April, the presentation tool was gone.
And Gamma? Operating successfully. Releasing regular updates. Growing steadily.
Where did it all go wrong? What can this comparison tell us about choosing AI presentation tools when results actually matter?
To understand the Tome vs Gamma story, we need to look at what went down.
How Tome blew through millions before collapsing
At first, Tome seemed like it couldn’t lose. The pitch in 2022 was simple: describe your presentation, get a finished deck. Design skills? Unnecessary. They exploded.
1 million users within four months. At 10 months, they reached 10 million users. At 18 months, they hit 20 million users. Growth like that attracts attention. Investors poured in $81 million. The company was valued at $300 million.
The impressive growth numbers hid a fundamental issue. Conversions to paid plans were nearly nonexistent. The user base skewed heavily toward students working on projects and freelancers building portfolios. Users seeking free presentations with no ability to pay.
Organizations with money to spend—enterprises, sales teams, marketing departments—ignored it. Why? These features didn’t address their core needs:
- PowerPoint exports that failed
- Not much room to customize your branding
- Templates that were basically all the same
- Didn’t connect with the tools people already used
- Credits running out when you needed them most
Despite 20 million users, annual revenue stayed below $4 million. The economics failed. A tech company with 60 people needs far more than $4 million a year to operate.
April 2024 brought the first layoffs—about 20% of staff. The company pivoted to sales automation, abandoning presentations. March 2025: Tome announced it was closing the presentation product.
The service went dark by late April.
What does this tell us? Millions of users mean little without paying customers. A polished deck doesn’t matter if it’s not solving real problems.
How Gamma survived
From the beginning, Gamma chose a different path.
Gamma didn’t attempt full automation. AI became an assistant, not a substitute. You remain in control. You explain what you want. Look over the outline first. Edit as needed. AI handles the execution while you control the thinking.
This draws in more types of users. People who need their presentation software to integrate with the tools they already use.
Look at Gamma’s 2025 performance. The user base is in the millions. The critical part: many convert to paying customers. The free tier provides enough to evaluate the platform. Plus runs $8 monthly, Pro costs $18, and both tiers offer genuine value.
They add features based on user feedback:
- Export to PowerPoint and PDF that works
- AI image generation
- Smart diagrams from text descriptions
- Real-time collaboration that doesn’t break
- Brand kits that maintain consistency
- Analytics to track engagement
- Expanded beyond presentations to websites and documents
Growth that actually lasts. No viral explosions, just steady growth.
What feature comparisons miss about Tome and Gamma
If you just compare feature lists, you miss the whole point. When you look at Tome vs Gamma features side by side, both could generate a deck for you. Both used AI to do the heavy lifting. Both were easy enough to figure out.
So what made the difference? The real difference between Tome and Gamma comes down to how they each understood what problem they were solving.
Tome wanted to be a magic button. Push it, get slides done. Remove all friction. Make it so easy that millions of people would use it. Then figure out monetization later.
That’s a social media growth playbook. It doesn’t work for B2B tools.
Gamma wanted to be useful for professionals. Solve real workflow problems. Make the core experience good enough that people would pay for it. Then improve based on what paying customers needed.
That’s a software business playbook. It works.
Comparing Tome and Gamma: what both tools still can’t do
Here’s where it gets interesting. Even though Gamma succeeded where Tome closed up shop, both tools hit the same wall.
They make presentations that look fine. But looking fine isn’t enough when there’s something real on the line.
Think about a presentation that actually changed how you saw something. One that made you want to do something different. One that you remembered days later. What made it stick?
Probably not the template choice. Not the AI-written slides. Not those perfectly smooth color gradients.
It was someone thinking strategically. Someone who understood what you needed to hear. Who emphasized certain moments. Who created points that landed with weight. Who made you feel something shift.
AI can’t do that. Not yet. It doesn’t grasp:
- What your specific audience worries about
- How your particular industry operates
- What your audience has already heard everywhere
- What will genuinely catch them off guard
- When to lead with numbers versus narratives
- How to sequence information so it builds momentum
So you get presentations that handle everyday work fine:
- Your weekly team sync
- Internal training decks
- Progress updates
- Training materials
- General overviews
But for presentations that carry weight? Where results hinge on how effectively you communicate? AI doesn’t cut it.
When human designers become necessary
Professional presentation work starts before opening any software.
Real designers work out what you’re actually trying to accomplish.
Who’s in the room? What decision they’re facing. What makes them doubt. What they’ve encountered before. What pushes them from maybe to yes.
Everything else flows from that foundation. What makes the cut. Where the eye should go. How your story flows. What needs emphasis.
Take SlidePeak. The team sees presentations as communication problems, not just design work. They start by asking:
- What are you actually trying to accomplish?
- Who’s in the room?
- What’s their current thinking?
- What objections will they throw at you?
- What’s the one thing they need to walk away with?
Then they create something built for your exact situation. Not just slapping your logo on a template. Something built specifically for what you’re trying to do.
What brand alignment actually looks like
Sure, Canva and Gamma let you upload your logo and pick your colors. That’s just decoration.
Real alignment means picking fonts that match your company’s voice. Images that signal where you sit in your industry. A visual rhythm that matches how you show up everywhere else. Everything working together to show who you actually are.
A real designer makes your deck feel like it actually came from you, not from a template library. Not just template #47 with your logo dropped in.
Why story structure matters
Good decks need a story backbone. Creating tension. Paying it off. Moments that catch people off guard. A rhythm that keeps people with you.
Experienced designers know when numbers hit harder than stories. When to stay silent and let the image speak. When to speed up and when to let something breathe. When to give them what they expect, and when to surprise them.
You learn this by watching what actually works. What gets investors to say yes. What closes the deal. What keeps people paying attention instead of checking their phones.
Where you see the craft
You can spot the gap between the algorithm output and human craft in the details. Fonts that read clearly at any scale. Color decisions that trigger the right responses. Flow between concepts that feels deliberate.
All these small choices add up. They create work that feels refined and makes your thinking look as sharp as it is.
SlidePeak brings together strategic planning, design skills, and business sense. Designers who’ve been at this for years. No cookie-cutter templates. No software making educated guesses. Work built around what you’re trying to pull off.
Does it cost more than Gamma? Absolutely. But when your presentation is deciding whether you get funded, land a major deal, or get board approval? That’s when decent versus excellent actually matters.
What the Tome vs Gamma comparison really shows
Tome went after users instead of solving real problems. That’s why they shut down.
Gamma works because it fixes real problems that people will actually pay to fix.
So, which is better: Tome or Gamma?
Since Tome shut down, the question of Tome or Gamma for presentations answers itself. But the larger lesson matters.
For everyday decks, Gamma does the job. Weekly team syncs, training decks, project updates. You save time and end up with something usable.
But when your presentation is deciding whether you get funded, land a major deal, or get board approval? That’s when decent versus excellent actually matters.
That’s when you need real strategy, design chops, and the kind of judgment you only get from doing this for years.
When your presentation could change the outcome, paying for professional work is worth it.
Set up a call with a professional to discuss your next project. You’ll find out what becomes possible when skill and strategy work together.
