amige. vs
ZeroGPT.

by Tuan Hoang · detection lead · last reviewed 2026-06-16 · pricing updates often, check vendor for current numbers
cheap and free. with a real catch.
 amige.ZeroGPT
founded2026 · public team + fundingunknown · operator not publicly disclosed
modalitiesimage · video · texttext + image (no video, no audio)
free tier3 scans / day15,000 characters / check, no signup
entry paid plan$9 / month (Pass)~$7.99 / month (Personal, annual — uncertain)
APIno public API (yet)yes, pay-as-you-go (no public rate card)
self-reported accuracyno single headline number98.8% in marketing copy
independent benchmarksrouted panel · see /the-machine70-85% with 15-33% FPR on academic writing
model attributionyesno
humanizer + detector on same domainnoyes
COVERAGE, SIDE BY SIDEamige.ZeroGPTimagevideotextnames the modelvideo + attribution; ZeroGPT has neither
what each tool actually covers — amige. vs ZeroGPT

looking for a ZeroGPT alternative?

ZeroGPT is the high-traffic free-tier AI-text detector that captures most price-conscious comparison searches in the category: 15,000 characters per scan, no signup, no friction, and independently measured false-positive rates of 15-33% on human academic writing. founders, funding, and headcount are not published; the team is effectively anonymous. the product is a checker on the same domain as a humanizer, a paraphraser, a grammar tool, a plagiarism checker, a summarizer, and a translator.

the free tier is best-in-class as a casual checker. people use it. that's the reason ZeroGPT shows up at the top of “free AI detector” searches.

where ZeroGPT is stronger

free-tier ceiling and friction. 15,000 characters per scan, no signup, no email, ad-supported. for a student checking their own essay or a casual curiosity scan, nothing in the category is lower-friction. amige.'s 3 scans per day with no signup beats ZeroGPT only on modality-breadth; on raw text capacity, ZeroGPT wins by an order of magnitude.

distribution surface. WhatsApp and Telegram bots in addition to web + API. the bot distribution is unusual and captures a real chunk of mobile-first usage. amige. doesn't ship there.

entry-paid price (if the third-party numbers hold). ~$7.99 / month on annual billing per aggregator review sites. amige.'s $9 / month is close but not under.

ZeroGPT sells both the humanizer that defeats AI detectors and the detector itself, on the same homepage.

where amige. is stronger

independent benchmark reality. ZeroGPT's 98.8% marketing claim doesn't survive contact with real human writing. independent 2025-2026 tests put real-world accuracy at 70-85% with false-positive rates from 15% to 33% on academic writing, and a ~19% FPR specifically on non-native English speakers. multiple reviewers explicitly recommend against using it for any decision that matters. amige. doesn't headline a single number on purpose; the engine routes each scan, weighs a panel of independent detectors, names the likely maker, and abstains rather than forcing one number.

image and video detection. ZeroGPT has a basic AI-image detector. amige.'s panel was built for image authenticity (Midjourney, DALL-E, Stable Diffusion, Flux, GPT Image, Nano Banana), video AI detection, and deepfake-specific signals. for any non-text use case, ZeroGPT doesn't compete.

model attribution. ZeroGPT says “AI” or “human” with a percentage and a sentence heatmap. amige. names the likely generator.

structural conflict of interest. ZeroGPT operates both an AI humanizer and an AI detector on the same domain. the same operator monetizes both “help me defeat detection” and “help me catch AI” from the same audience. amige. has no humanizer product. readers can decide whether that dual offering meets their bar for an impartial verdict.

the accuracy story

ZeroGPT's gap between marketing claim (98.8%) and independent measurement (70-85% with 15-33% FPR) is the widest in the category we've documented. the failure modes are the universal ones (ESL false positives, paraphraser defeat, short-text floor) without the better-funded engineering investment that GPTZero, Pangram, or Originality have made to soften them.

detectors in the category typically claim 99% and measure 65-90% in independent tests. ZeroGPT lands at the lower end of that range with the widest claim/reality gap.

the humanizer next door

the same brand operates an AI “humanizer” that markets bypassing detectors. a detector and an evasion tool under one roof is a conflict of interest worth weighing when you read the free verdict.

who each is for

pick ZeroGPT if you want a no-signup quick check on a paragraph or two, you understand the verdict is approximate, and you're not making any consequential call based on it. usable for curiosity, not for consequential accusations.

pick amige. if you want to check an image, a video, or a text and you'd rather see a panel of classifiers than a single confident-looking percentage, with model attribution, a free tier that lasts beyond one session, and methodology that is upfront about its limits.

for the “quickly check my essay” case at very low stakes, ZeroGPT is fine. for anything that matters, the independent-benchmark story should weigh more than the free-tier ceiling.

questions

Yes. ZeroGPT’s free tier checks up to 15,000 characters per scan with no signup, which is best-in-class for a casual text check. amige. gives 3 free scans per day across image, video, and text, which is smaller on raw text capacity but broader on modality.

ZeroGPT markets 98.8%, but independent 2025-2026 tests put real-world accuracy at 70-85% with false-positive rates from 15% to 33% on human academic writing. Several reviewers advise against using it for any decision that matters. amige. routes each scan to the detectors strongest for it, fuses a panel of independent reads, names the likely maker, and abstains rather than forcing one confident percentage.

for a no-stakes quick text check, ZeroGPT’s free ceiling is hard to beat. amige. covers image, video, and text, names the likely generator, and shows per-detector scores. ZeroGPT also runs an AI humanizer on the same domain as its detector, so the same operator profits from both defeating and catching AI; amige. has no humanizer product.

ZeroGPT has a basic AI-image detector but no video detection and no model attribution. amige.’s panel was built for image authenticity across Midjourney, DALL-E, Stable Diffusion, and more, plus video and deepfake signals.

sources.

  1. 01
    ZeroGPT — pricing page
    Verified 2026-05-16; dollar amounts SPA-rendered, third-party aggregator figures used.
  2. 02
  3. 03
  4. 04
run a scan, see for yourself →is this AI? →