At Devblock, we’re constantly exploring how AI can elevate the design process without sacrificing quality, creativity, or usability. For our Outlet project, we put that curiosity into practice—using ten different AI-powered design tools to solve real design challenges across wireframing, flows, and early visuals.

This post shares what we actually built with each tool, how it performed, and our honest take on its strengths and shortcomings.

---

V0 – Best for Functional Flows Early On

Rating: 9/10

V0 stood out as an ideal tool for early-stage wireframing and prototyping. It created fully interactive flows and allowed us to make direct edits to selected areas, while accurately capturing complex requirements with appropriate components. It also supported Figma importing and referencing screenshots, which streamlined parts of our workflow.

The main limitation was that assets still needed to be brought back into Figma to look production-ready. Visual editing remained difficult, especially when trying to match an existing design system. It also sometimes over-complicated tasks by adjusting code unnecessarily when a simpler solution would do.

Still, V0 was one of our strongest tools in terms of structure and UX thinking.

---

Lovable – Same Strengths, Slightly More Style

Rating: 9/10

Lovable offered nearly all the same advantages as V0, with an added layer of visual polish. It incorporated more color and styling by default, which made its output feel more presentation-ready compared to V0’s black-and-white wireframes.

However, it shared the same limitations—mainly the need to bring assets back into Figma for refinement and the difficulty of aligning to a custom design system without a manual workaround. That said, if you’re choosing between the two and want slightly more visual fidelity, Lovable may be the better pick.

---

Claude – Interesting Idea, Not Ready for Visuals

Rating: 7/10

Claude’s output was limited to static images, though this might be due to the prompt we used. While it has potential as an ideation tool, the output didn’t feel usable. The visuals resembled loose sketches more than components that could be handed off to developers or stakeholders.

We’d like to explore it further with different prompts, but for now, it feels more like a thought partner than a design production tool.

---

Bolt – Simple to Start, But Too Basic

Rating: 4/10

Bolt was extremely easy to use, and it did support multi-screen flows with cohesive design layouts. However, the quality of the output was underwhelming. Customization was very limited, and once a layout was generated, it was difficult to tweak. The static output didn’t offer enough flexibility for iteration.

This tool may be useful for quick sketching or stakeholder demos, but not for serious design work.

---

Relume – Great for Landing Pages

Rating: 6/10

Relume was particularly fast when it came to layout iterations, module switching, and syncing with a sitemap. It was very effective for landing page design, especially when exploring modular layout combinations and seeing rapid iterations.

Its main drawback was that it felt confined to single-page websites. While it excels at that use case, it doesn’t scale well for apps or end-to-end product experiences.

---

UX Pilot – Speedy Ideas, Limited Flow Support

Rating: 6/10

UX Pilot generated early wireframes and sitemaps from text prompts with impressive speed. It was especially helpful for brainstorming or kicking off sprints without needing deep Figma skills.

However, it fell short on full-flow support. Customization options were limited after generation, and each new screen required starting from scratch, which slowed iteration. It also lacked cohesion across screens unless adjusted manually.

---

Uizard – Visual Styling with Narrow Scope

Rating: 4/10

Uizard produced nicely styled screens with more visual direction than many tools we tested. It was helpful when focusing on individual screens or refining design direction.

That said, Uizard wasn’t built for full flow creation. You begin with a single screen and build out from there, which made it less useful for complex user journeys or scalable interfaces.

---

Visily AI – Fast, But Feels Templated

Rating: 4/10

Visily AI offered pre-built UI components and even included images in its mockups, which helped speed up wireframing. Unfortunately, it lacked depth. The output felt overly templated and difficult to customize for more complex flows.

It struggled with flexibility, and its results didn’t meet the standards we expect for production-ready or high-fidelity designs. It’s best suited for quick, one-off concepts—not comprehensive UX work.

---

Creatie – Strong Visual Direction, Limited Interactivity

Rating: 6/10

Creatie impressed with its ability to generate visually styled screens. It was particularly useful for exploring art direction or quickly testing visual themes.

However, like Uizard, it wasn’t designed for multi-screen flows. You start with one screen and build linearly, which restricts broader UX applications.

---

Galileo AI – Best Aesthetics in Its Class

Rating: 6/10

Among the more visually focused tools, Galileo AI had the strongest design output. The visuals were attractive and well-composed, making it a solid choice for style direction.

It shared the same structural limitations as Creatie and Uizard. It was not optimized for designing complex flows, and its workflow felt centered around one screen at a time.

---

Final Thoughts

None of these AI tools can yet replace human designers—but the best ones can significantly augment our speed, output, and ideation process.

With the right tools in our stack, we were able to create finished wireframes 60% faster—something that would traditionally take much longer. AI helped us move faster without cutting corners on usability, quality or structure.

V0 and Lovable stood out for their ability to generate structured, interactive flows that were actually usable. Relume and UX Pilot excelled at early ideation, while Galileo, Creatie, and Uizard offered valuable design direction for single screens or themes.

The tools that underperformed typically fell short on flexibility, flow design, or production-level quality.

We’ll continue testing and experimenting—but AI is already playing a meaningful role in our design process, helping us move faster and think bigger.

Curious how AI tools could enhance your next product design?
Let’s talk about how we blend hands-on UX expertise with cutting-edge AI tools to create smarter, faster, more adaptive digital experiences.
Contact us to start your next project—enhanced by AI.