Skip to main content

Figma Make Ai Credit Limits Not Feasible

  • March 10, 2026
  • 112 replies
  • 2221 views

Show first post

112 replies

  • March 17, 2026

Im out, moved all front-ends to vercel, kept the supabase backends, GitHub holds the repos, and im using opencode to do the prompts, its quick, accurate and i have made 10 times the progress in 24 hours then what i did with Figma, there are alternatives, the cost point is very different as well as the ability to use any models i want without restriction. Its actually made the deploys much more efficient with extended error checking.

@kitwalker14   I was planning the same.. how do you manage the image bedding issue from Figma? the links in repo apparently will never work if directing to figma still.. 
 

I just got opencode with the models in github to prepare the repo for vercel, it did the whole job from start to finish, once done, get the step by step from opencode for the deploy in vercel, deploys in seconds


  • Previous usage: ~200,000 credits / month

  • Current allowance: 3,000 credits / month

  • Reduction: ~98.5%

This is not a marginal adjustment.
It effectively makes the previous workflow non-viable.

Additionally:

  • Average generation cost: ~100 credits per run
    → Current allowance supports ~30 generations per month

In practice, this means:

“Even basic iteration and experimentation are heavily constrained.”

2. The Core Problem: Not Cost — But Loss of Exploration

The value of Figma Make is not just generation. It lies in:

rapid iteration → comparison → selection → refinement

However, under the current system:

  • Failed prompts = immediate cost loss

  • Iteration = expensive

  • Exploration = discouraged

As a result:

“The process required to reach a good outcome is effectively blocked.”

This is not just a pricing issue.
It is a fundamental UX constraint.

3. Practical Impact (Real Workflows)

This limitation is especially critical for:

  • Admin dashboard design

  • Repetitive UI structures

  • Multi-variant exploration

  • Rapid MVP prototyping

These workflows inherently rely on:

“Generate multiple options → choose the best → refine”

The current credit model makes this process impractical.

4. Implicit Assumption in the Current Model

The credit system appears to assume:

“Users will generate correct or usable results in a single attempt.”

In reality:

  • Most outputs require iteration

  • First results are rarely production-ready

  • Prompt refinement is part of the workflow

Therefore:

The current system does not align with real-world design behavior.

5. Suggestions for Improvement

Rather than simply increasing credit limits, structural adjustments would be more effective:

1) Credit Rollover

  • Allow unused credits to carry over

  • Enables batching exploration when needed

2) Low-Cost / Low-Fidelity Mode

  • Provide a cheaper “exploration mode”

  • Supports rapid iteration without high cost

3) Team-Based Credit Pooling

  • Shared credit allocation across teams

  • Reflects actual collaborative workflows

4) Experimental Free Tier

  • Limited but repeatable testing environment

  • Reduces friction for iterative use

6. Outcome of the Current Policy

The current structure leads to:

  • Light users → minimal impact

  • Heavy users → reduced usage or churn

In other words:

“The users who extract the most value are the ones most likely to disengage.”

7. Closing

Figma Make is a powerful capability with clear potential to improve productivity.
However, the current credit system significantly limits its practical usability.

This is not about cost sensitivity.
It is about alignment between product design and real workflows.

I’m interested in hearing how other heavy users are adapting to this change.


AI-generated output is inherently iterative, not deterministic.
Charging per attempt assumes correctness on the first try — which contradicts how generative systems actually work.

Figma Make is positioned as a tool for rapid, natural-language-driven creation,
but the current credit model penalizes the very iteration that makes this possible.

This isn’t just a pricing issue.
It’s a misalignment between product design and real-world usage.


Figma Make currently allows users to select different AI models, but there doesn’t seem to be any meaningful difference in how credits are consumed based on that choice.

If model selection is exposed to users, it would make more sense for credit usage to reflect that — allowing users to balance cost vs. quality depending on their needs.

Introducing a transparent, model-based credit structure could improve both usability and trust, while giving users real control over how they use AI features.


JaredSF
  • New Member
  • March 18, 2026

Hi,

cant agree more on this.  We are have been actively hammering make before the credits were counted.  But the majority (40%) of credits are to either fix issues cretaed by make or where it says its done something and hasn’t.

 

There doesn’t seem to be a credit refund system so this as a business model doesnt make sense.  We would be more than happy to pay a larger amount for and all you can eat subscription with reasonable daily limits (500?)  much like Claudes subscription model.

 

That being said we are now seriously considering the viability of make for even basic wireframing


UserFiore
  • New Member
  • March 18, 2026

3,000 is too low. It uses up credits just asking “would you like to implement” and then I have to respond “yes” and then it uses even more credits to implement. 

 

So why are we being charged twice just for replying “Yes, implement the change”?

 

 


Jeff_Hart
  • March 18, 2026

Well that was fun while it lasted. Great job, Figma! You managed to build up a huge customer base just so you could piss them off and destroy you business in a single day. Kudos, if that was your goal. Mission accomplished.

On the day you started counting credits, I burned through my monthly limit within 5 hours. Your model is completely unrealistic and downright greedy. Either you wait until you’ve perfected it to launch such a feature, or give us 20x the credits, or significantly lower the price. Until you address this, it’s on to better things for those of us with a big to do list and no bottomless pot of gold to draw from. You’re not the only game in town.


Eutimio Garcia

Ok so i woke up today and can not work on my app due to credit limits.  Figma said they will start to enforce credits on the 18th .  But to my surprise they already enforced all the months credits,  so now i have to wait 8 days to do anything again.  

And yea 3k credits a month is a joke.   I guess Figma going public made them only think about investor and not users.  And yea i am both investor and user.   Today i will short everything a have on Figma cause i see no future in this kids toy.  
 

8% is just the beginning

So Figma has lost 8% in value just today. i guess this is just starting.  


Patrick Thommen

We’ve been running a test phase beforehand, and while Figma Make is powerful, its limitations significantly reduce its potential for long‑term use. During this roughly two‑week test period, a single person using it on a normal daily basis consumed around 269,000 credits.

For comparison: the highest available credit package offers 15,000 credits for about $350. It’s easy to estimate what 269,000 credits for just one person would cost.

In short: extremely expensive.!

Usage of about 2 weeks...
Highest pack is 15k credits for 351...

 


Ryan_Stiers
  • New Member
  • March 18, 2026

Enterprise power user here. Agree with everyone that the current credit limits are laughably low, and will be the end of Make in our org(hundreds of users).. it only makes sence as functionally unlimited for Enterprise or allow us to connect to models we are already paying for to do the processing...

As of today I am critically blocked by the token limits on several large prototypes… and our enterprise thinks Figma is already expensive, so I guess this is how it ends for Make if not Figma as a realistic option, and we are never going back to manual prototypes due to credit limits… we will move to other workflows, and fast..

Also worth calling out that the current models are no where near good enough to cap usage so aggressively, like everyone else noted, most of my credits are spent fixing issues caused by Make in the first place..

Massive strategy failure from the Figma team…


Patrick Thommen

@Ryan_Stiers, let me know if you find anything comparable to it.👌


Arnold Daniels

I just cancelled. Too bad.


Josh22
  • New Participant
  • March 18, 2026

My AI credits were exhausted just one day into the new billing cycle. As a result, I am now in a position where I have to tell PMs that I can’t deliver interactive prototypes for user testing or feedback anymore.

Because of this, the team is actively looking to move away from Make and evaluate alternative tools. While AI prototyping isn’t the main purpose of design work, AI tools (like Make) get us closer to real, functional product experiences and improve UX decisions and UI design. They are more efficient than manually building a prototype in a vector-based tool like the main Figma product, which is limited, slow, has ongoing bugs for YEARS, and is harder to create the same level of interactivity as Make would. Especially with regard to enterprise-level products. I am not designing landing/marketing pages or a small mobile app here. Unlike the yearly Config event where they would show of “look you can click the plus and minus button on this numerical counter for a mobile app and it just works!” (remember that presentation, oooooh! /s)

The pricing model for additional AI credits is not a viable option. Given current budget constraints in the overall market at software companies, it’s unrealistic to justify ~$2,880 per user annually. With my current team size, this is not a cost-effective solution.

It’s hard enough for designers to justify their jobs (and salaries) at non-design-lead companies (most of them are like this), then justify the cost of the main Figma tool. Now we have to justify the cost of AI-driven tools at a very steep price. At once point I was asked “what’s wrong with Adobe products?!”, yeah...


Justin Ryea
  • New Member
  • March 18, 2026

Figma Make is incredible. Now let's talk about the credits problem.

I'll set the scene: I'm a super user, long-time Figma fan, and over the past month I've been building complex prototypes in Figma Make — the kind I need to put in front of real users to validate with the market. Not toy demos. Real, layered, interactive prototypes.

In the span of about 2 hours, across 3 prompts, I burned through my entire month's worth of full-seat credits.

I'm now sitting here waiting on a response from your Head of UX about getting more credits, which gave me just enough time to write this.

The usage math is hard to ignore

After looping in our rep, I learned I'm apparently in the 10-15x monthly usage category with my current design file burning up 50,000 credits— so, not exactly the median user. I get that. The options on the table are a higher-priced pooled plan across our org (genuinely appreciate this option existing) or pay-as-you-go top-ups. Given that I burned a month of credits in 2 hours, pay-as-you-go would be financially catastrophic for how I work.

Here's the thing that's hard to shake though: what's being sold as credits is, at its core, token throughput — the same commodity I can access through OpenAI, Gemini, or Anthropic APIs directly. My rough estimate puts the markup somewhere in the 50–100x range? Am I off? That's a wide margin, and it's the kind of margin that historically invites disruption from a competitor willing to let users bring their own API keys with a higher flat seat fee.

Some thoughts on where this could go

I'm not here to tell Figma how to run a business — clearly you've built something people (including me) are genuinely addicted to - it’s absolutely incredible. But I do think about pricing and usage design in the products we build, and one principle I keep coming back to: don't put a wall between your users and the behavior you want them to have. Usage limits do exactly that.

A few models worth considering:

  • A power user tier — something in the $200–300/month range for unlimited or very high usage, similar to what GPT Pro, Gemini Advanced, or Grok Heavy are doing. For users like me, that's a real option.
  • Bring-your-own-API-key — let advanced users connect their own keys. Charge a premium seat fee for the Figma layer on top. This actually creates a higher willingness-to-pay ceiling, not lower.
  • Ecosystem monetization — integrations with the likes of Supabase, data layers, or tools that bridge design to real software creation could open up entirely new revenue streams without throttling core usage.
  • A tier aimed at real software creation — because that's the direction this is heading and we all know it.

I'd even take ads in a free tier over a usage cap, honestly. At least that keeps people in the tool.

I want Figma Make to win. I want to keep building in it. But the current credit model will price out exactly the users who would be its loudest evangelists and most compelling case studies. That feels like a miss worth fixing.

Happy to talk through any of this further — apparently I have some free time while I wait on that email back. 😄


DonDesigns
  • New Member
  • March 18, 2026

But to my surprise they already enforced all the months credits,  so now i have to wait 8 days to do anything again.  

 

Mine for whatever reason won’t reset until April 7, twenty days from now. Plenty of time for us to find an alternative since my company isn’t going to pay what it’d cost for my normal usage when we can do similar for much less elsewhere.


Justin Ryea
  • New Member
  • March 18, 2026

Figma Make is incredible. Now let's talk about the credits problem.

I'll set the scene: I'm a super user, long-time Figma fan, and over the past month I've been building complex prototypes in Figma Make — the kind I need to put in front of real users to validate with the market. Not toy demos. Real, layered, interactive prototypes.

In the span of about 2 hours, across 3 prompts, I burned through my entire month's worth of full-seat credits - to the previous users comments - i bet another user’s point,  i bet i used 3x this creating a light mode of my last protoype and far more credits seem to be used for fixing bugs and crashes vs actually designing prototypes.  I guarantee there are bugs that along took the entire days credits to resolve - one i was working on 

I'm now sitting here waiting on a response from your Head of UX about getting more credits, which gave me just enough time to write this.

The usage math is hard to ignore

After looping in our rep, I learned I'm apparently in the 10x monthly usage category — so, not exactly the median user. I get that. The options on the table are a higher-priced pooled plan across our org (genuinely appreciate this option existing) or pay-as-you-go top-ups. Given that I burned a month of credits in 2 hours, pay-as-you-go would be financially catastrophic for how I work.

Here's the thing that's hard to shake though: what's being sold as credits is, at its core, token throughput — the same commodity I can access through OpenAI, Gemini, or Anthropic APIs directly. My rough estimate puts the markup somewhere in the 50–100x range. That's a wide margin, and it's the kind of margin that historically invites disruption from a competitor willing to let users bring their own API keys with a higher flat seat fee.

Some thoughts on where this could go

I'm not here to tell Figma how to run a business — clearly you've built something people (including me) are genuinely addicted to. But I do think about pricing and usage design in the products we build, and one principle I keep coming back to: don't put a wall between your users and the behavior you want them to have. Usage limits do exactly that.

A few models worth considering:

  • A power user tier — something in the $200–300/month range for unlimited or very high usage, similar to what GPT Pro, Gemini Advanced, or Grok Heavy are doing. For users like me, that's a real option.
  • Bring-your-own-API-key — let advanced users connect their own keys. Charge a premium seat fee for the Figma layer on top. This actually creates a higher willingness-to-pay ceiling, not lower.
  • Ecosystem monetization — integrations with the likes of Supabase, data layers, or tools that bridge design to real software creation could open up entirely new revenue streams without throttling core usage.
  • A tier aimed at real software creation — because that's the direction this is heading and we all know it.

I'd even take ads in a free tier over a usage cap, honestly. At least that keeps people in the tool.

I want Figma Make to win. I want to keep building in it. But the current credit model will price out exactly the users who would be its loudest evangelists and most compelling case studies. That feels like a miss worth fixing.

Happy to talk through any of this further — apparently I have some free time while I wait on that email back. 😄


JobGhost
  • New Member
  • March 18, 2026

I have a lot of projects on Figma that now I am not sure I will ever finish. I am going to switch to v0 by Vercel since it costs significantly less, I usually have to do somewhere between 200-300 prompts for it to get things right. It makes mistakes a lot. It cost me 14 credits to change the color of a button. 134 credits to update colors on like two pages. They are out of their minds and going to lose so many customers because of this. 


Trent Oscroft

I Made 3 prompt burned  500 credits, going to have to use a new program because this aint it 


Peacemaker_Colt

So for $16 a month I get 3000 points to use, but it then costs $24 to get 1000 more points? So $8 more more 66% less AI points? Why wouldn’t i just create dummy after dummy account, to get the 3000 points for 16$? That mentality is going to sink this company. and that is just my 2c. Talk about price gouging for AI points… Usually refills are LESS than the initial price, not here it appears.


Greg Best Bites

This post is spot on!  Considering the fact that Anthropic and OpenAI are giving you 10x more credits now for the price than they use to how is 3k credit enough with Figma?  I have another issue, don’t we get 3k credit with a professional seat?  I added 1k more, total of 4k but was shut off today when I used 1k?  Not sure Figma know how to do math.


I recently shared feedback about the Figma Make credit system, but my previous post appears to have been removed without explanation. If it was taken down due to tone or guidelines, I understand moderation is necessary—but I would appreciate more transparency. This is intended as structured, constructive feedback based on real usage.

1. Real Usage Pattern (Heavy User Perspective)

In my case:

  • ~5,000+ prompts executed

  • Monthly usage previously reached ~100,000–150,000 credits

This was not due to misuse, but because:

AI workflows are inherently iterative — not one-shot.

A typical process looks like:

  • Prompt → result → refine → regenerate → repeat

  • Often 10–30 iterations are required for a usable outcome

This is normal behavior when working with generative systems.

2. Core Issue: Iteration Is Being Penalized

The current credit model effectively charges per attempt.

However:

“One usable result” often requires multiple attempts.

This creates a mismatch:

  • The product encourages rapid iteration

  • The pricing discourages iteration

As a result:

The core workflow of exploration → refinement is constrained.

3. Lack of Cost Predictability

According to the documentation:

  • Credit usage depends on complexity, model, and internal agent actions

  • Cost cannot be estimated in advance

This leads to:

  • No way to predict cost before execution

  • No ability to plan or optimize usage

In practice:

Cost becomes reactive rather than controllable.

4. Model Selection Without Meaningful Cost Control

Figma Make allows users to select different AI models.

However:

  • Credit usage does not appear to be clearly differentiated

  • Total cost is still influenced by hidden factors (complexity, agent behavior)

This creates a disconnect:

Model selection is exposed, but cost control is not.

If users are given model choices, it would be more meaningful if:

  • Cost differences were transparent

  • Users could intentionally trade off quality vs cost

5. Impact on Workflow (Beyond Pricing)

The issue is not just cost.

It directly affects how people work:

  • Experimentation becomes risky

  • Trying new ideas feels costly

  • Users become overly conservative

This leads to:

Reduced exploration and slower product iteration.

6. Strategic Concern

From a product perspective:

  • Light users may not notice this issue

  • Heavy users (who rely on iteration) are most affected

This creates a risk:

The users who extract the most value may be the ones most constrained.

7. Suggestions

Some potential improvements:

  • Provide clearer cost estimation before execution

  • Introduce a lower-cost “exploration mode”

  • Align model selection with transparent credit differences

  • Consider partial cost reduction for iterative refinement within the same context

8. Closing

This is not a complaint about pricing alone.

It is about alignment between:

  • How generative AI actually works (iterative, exploratory)

  • And how the credit system is currently structured

Additionally, I would appreciate clarification on why previous feedback posts may be removed, so future discussions can remain within guidelines while still addressing real issues.

I’m interested in hearing how other users—especially those working iteratively—are adapting to this system.


VICTORIA HIGGINS

I have just bought 2.5K credits. Figma makes so many mistakes and does not correct them without lots of prompts which I am being charged for. This product is not ready to go to market at this price???


UserFiore
  • New Member
  • March 19, 2026

Does the point tool in Figma Make need AI credits to be used? I am not generating any prompts. I am not using the AI. It is currently disabled for me because I ran out of credits. Why do I need credits available to use it, if I am not asking the AI for anything?

 

I just wanted to update text without needing to look through all the code. I was able to use it without triggering a “credit usage” before the updates. I hope this is an error and not intentional, because that would be ridiculous when so many other website building sites let you change the text by just clicking it.


Albert NAMBIAPARAMBIL

Hi,
We’ve been attempting to scale our UI design process via Figma, but the current AI credit constraints are a significant bottleneck. Despite using precise prompts, the credit allotment is exhausted during the initial scaffolding phase, making it impossible to complete full screen designs or iterations. At this stage, Figma Make isn't viable for our workflow; shifting toward an MCP and AI-driven approach within GitHub appears to be a more efficient alternative.

Albert


  • March 19, 2026

Es un abuso he comprado 1000 créditos adicionales y solo he podido hacer tres consultas cuando se agotaron, esto es un robo. Cualquier otro sistema de IA gestiona muchísimo mejor los créditos, creo que a sido un autentico error que deben de corregir de inmediato, no me opongo a comprar créditos si es necesario, pero si tengo que gastar miles de $ en 4 sesiones de IA no le sale rentable a nadie. Hasta ahora he estado super contento con Figma, pero lamentándolo mucho si no cambian la política de gestión de Créditos, tendré que cerrar la cuenta e ir a otra plataforma para mis proyectos. Encima no hay forma de contactar con ellos, no me parece profesional. Yo estaba recomendando a todo el mundo Figma,  pero ahora dejaré de recomendarlo.