Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
Write emails 10x faster with AI. Generate email replies in Gmail™ with GPT latest models.
| GPT Workspace for Gmail™ | Gestion en masa | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | images | images |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
Its main functions are to facilitate the registration, modification, adhesion to groups and the elimination of users. Also the creation of shared folders,all in a massive, fast and easy way.
| Metric | GPT Workspace for Gmail™ | Gestion en masa |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.9 ★ | ★ 5.0 ★ |
| Total reviews | ★ 2.2k | 8 |
| Active installs | 1,831,328+ | 508,367+ |
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Pricing | Free of charge trial | Free of charge trial |
Gestion en masa edges out GPT Workspace for Gmail™ on rating (5.0★ vs 4.9★), but the gap is small enough that pricing fit and feature differentiation should drive the decision more than the headline number.
Pricing entry tiers: GPT Workspace for Gmail™ at Free of charge trial, Gestion en masa at Free of charge trial. Check each app's tier structure for the capacity limits you actually need before deciding — the headline number is the same shape, but the gating shape per tier (seats, usage volume, integrations) varies.
GPT Workspace for Gmail™ has the larger user base (2,218 reviews vs 8), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. Gestion en masa's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat.
Recommended by size: small/early-stage admins who need fast install and low risk should default to Gestion en masa; mid-market and enterprise admins with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — GPT Workspace for Gmail™'s 2,218-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Gestion en masa's broader-but-shallower coverage.
This verdict is generated from the live marketplace data on this page — rating, review count, pricing tier, and category position all refresh from the canonical Google Workspace Marketplace listing every 24 hours. AppRanks does not accept payment to influence comparison outcomes; the methodology is documented on the About page and applies identically to every pair on the site.
Read each app's audit: GPT Workspace for Gmail™ audit • Gestion en masa audit
No tracked changes.
Both GPT Workspace for Gmail™ and Gestion en masa offer paid plans only. GPT Workspace for Gmail™ starts at Free of charge trial; Gestion en masa starts at Free of charge trial. Compare the per-tier features in the Pricing section above before committing.
Gestion en masa has the higher average rating (5.0★ from 8 reviews) compared to GPT Workspace for Gmail™ (4.9★ from 2,218 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
Gestion en masa holds the higher average rating (5.0★ vs 4.9★). That is the one dimension AppRanks can separate them on here — read both apps' detail pages for the feature breakdown and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the Google Workspace Marketplace. GPT Workspace for Gmail™ has the deeper published review base (2,218 vs 8), which often — though not always — accompanies better-tested setup docs. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly: read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for user-reported install experience.
GPT Workspace for Gmail™ typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (2,218 reviews). Gestion en masa typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (8 reviews). A larger review base generally means the app has been exercised at scale — relevant if you are processing high volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. GPT Workspace for Gmail™ and Gestion en masa both publish their export options on their marketplace listing pages (or in their support docs); some apps offer one-click import from competitors, others require CSV. The fastest check: search "import from Gestion en masa" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
