Skip to index

AUTOMATIC1111 vs Invoke

AUTOMATIC1111 and Invoke are both Image Generation tools in our directory. This side-by-side comparison covers pricing, editorial scores, supported platforms, key features and open-source status so you can decide which one fits your needs.

Side-by-side comparison

AttributeAUTOMATIC1111Invoke
Product statusStatus not recordedActive
VendorAUTOMATIC1111Invoke
Rating★ 4.7★ 4.6
PricingFreeFree
PlatformsDesktop, Self-hostDesktop, Self-host
Key featuresText-to-image and image-to-image, Inpainting and outpainting, Batch processing and saved parametersLayered canvas with in/outpainting, Node-based workflows, Checkpoint and LoRA management
Headquarters——
Launched——
Open sourceYesYes

Key differences

  • AUTOMATIC1111 carries the higher editorial score (4.7★ vs 4.6★).
  • Both AUTOMATIC1111 and Invoke use a Free model.
  • Both AUTOMATIC1111 and Invoke are open source.
  • AUTOMATIC1111 runs on Desktop, Self-host; Invoke runs on Desktop, Self-host.

AUTOMATIC1111 and Invoke at a glance

AUTOMATIC1111

AUTOMATIC1111

A self-hosted Stable Diffusion interface with text/image generation, inpainting and configurable workflows.

Rating
4.7★
Pricing
Free

Editorial verdict

Choose compatible models and budget maintenance and hardware before adopting the UI.

Strengths

  • Documented editing and batch controls
  • Self-hosted environment and configurable models

Key features

  • Text-to-image and image-to-image
  • Inpainting and outpainting
  • Batch processing and saved parameters
  • LoRA, embeddings and extension support

Best for

  • Reviewed image drafts
  • Batch image-to-image experiments
Read the full AUTOMATIC1111 review →

Invoke

Invoke

A self-hosted image application with a layered canvas, node workflows and model management; the former vendor cloud has closed.

Rating
4.6★
Pricing
Free

Editorial verdict

Evaluate the community self-hosted application; do not buy on the assumption that its former cloud still operates.

Strengths

  • Canvas and reproducible workflows documented
  • Local deployment and model management

Key features

  • Layered canvas with in/outpainting
  • Node-based workflows
  • Checkpoint and LoRA management
  • Self-hosted browser interface

Best for

  • Reviewed layered image editing
  • Reusable self-hosted generation workflows
Read the full Invoke review →

Feature overlap

  • The two tools have no listed features in common — see both feature lists above.
  • AUTOMATIC1111 also lists: Text-to-image and image-to-image, Inpainting and outpainting, Batch processing and saved parameters, LoRA, embeddings and extension support
  • Invoke also lists: Layered canvas with in/outpainting, Node-based workflows, Checkpoint and LoRA management, Self-hosted browser interface

Frequently asked questions

Is AUTOMATIC1111 or Invoke better?

By editorial score, AUTOMATIC1111 scores higher (4.7★ vs 4.6★). Both are capable Image Generation tools, so review the feature comparison for your use case.

Which is cheaper, AUTOMATIC1111 or Invoke?

Both AUTOMATIC1111 and Invoke use a Free pricing model.

Are AUTOMATIC1111 and Invoke open source?

Yes — both AUTOMATIC1111 and Invoke are open source.

What platforms do AUTOMATIC1111 and Invoke support?

AUTOMATIC1111 supports Desktop, Self-host; Invoke supports Desktop, Self-host.

What are the main features of AUTOMATIC1111 and Invoke?

AUTOMATIC1111: Text-to-image and image-to-image, Inpainting and outpainting, Batch processing and saved parameters, LoRA, embeddings and extension support. Invoke: Layered canvas with in/outpainting, Node-based workflows, Checkpoint and LoRA management, Self-hosted browser interface.

Visit AUTOMATIC1111 →Visit Invoke →

More Image Generation comparisons

AUTOMATIC1111 vs ComfyUIAUTOMATIC1111 vs Draw ThingsAUTOMATIC1111 vs FluxAUTOMATIC1111 vs FooocusAUTOMATIC1111 vs KittlAUTOMATIC1111 vs Leonardo AI