The debate comes up in every faculty lounge, teacher Facebook group, and professional development session. Kahoot or Gimkit? Both platforms have passionate advocates, and both have transformed how review sessions feel in classrooms worldwide.
I’ve used both extensively—Kahoot for years before Gimkit existed, and Gimkit regularly since discovering it. They’re both excellent tools, but they’re not interchangeable. The right choice depends entirely on your teaching context, your students, and what you’re trying to accomplish.
This guide breaks down the real differences, not just the feature lists you can find on their websites. After countless sessions with both platforms, I’ve developed strong opinions about when each one shines and when it falls short.
Let’s dig in.
The Fundamental Difference
Before comparing specific features, understand the core philosophical difference between these platforms.
Kahoot is built around synchronous, timed competition. Everyone answers the same question simultaneously, racing against a countdown. Speed and accuracy both matter. It’s designed for energy, excitement, and whole-class moments.
Gimkit is built around self-paced progression with economic mechanics. Students answer questions at their own speed, earn virtual currency, and make strategic decisions about upgrades and power-ups. It’s designed for sustained engagement and repeated practice.
This fundamental difference shapes everything else. Neither approach is inherently better—they serve different purposes.
How Each Platform Works
Kahoot Gameplay
A Kahoot session follows a predictable rhythm:
- The teacher displays a question on the main screen.
- Answer options appear on student devices (colors and shapes, not the question text)
- Everyone has a set time limit to answer (typically 5-30 seconds)
- A countdown creates urgency.
- When time expires or everyone answers, the correct answer is revealed.
- Points are awarded based on accuracy and speed.
- A leaderboard shows current standings.
- The next question begins.
Students must look at two screens—the main display for the question and their device for the answer buttons. This creates a shared experience where the whole class moves through content together.
Games typically last 10-20 minutes, depending on question count. The energy is high, the pace is fast, and there’s usually cheering (or groaning) after each question.
Gimkit Gameplay
Gimkit sessions feel quite different:
- Students see questions individually on their own devices.
- They answer at their own pace—no synchronized timer.
- Correct answers earn virtual money; wrong answers may cost money.
- Between questions, students spend earnings on upgrades, multipliers, and power-ups.
- The game continues until time expires or a money goal is reached.
- Students encounter the same questions multiple times, reinforcing content.
The experience is more individual. Students are heads-down on their own devices, making strategic decisions about their virtual economy while practicing content. The class doesn’t share synchronized moments the way Kahoot creates.
Games often run longer—15-30 minutes is common—because the self-paced nature and upgrade system encourage sustained play.
Question Types and Content Creation
Kahoot Question Options
Kahoot offers several question formats:
- Quiz questions: Standard multiple choice with 2-4 options
- True/False: Binary choice questions
- Type answer: Students type a response (helpful for spelling, vocabulary, or math)
- Puzzle: Arrange items in the correct order
- Poll: Gather opinions without correct answers
- Slide: Display information without a question (for instruction breaks)
- Word cloud: Collect and display student responses visually
- Open-ended: Free response without predetermined answers
- Brainstorm: Collect ideas from the class.
- Drop pin: Location-based responses on images
This variety allows for creative, mixed-format games. You can include information slides between questions, gather opinions, and go beyond simple recall.
Gimkit Question Options
Gimkit keeps things simpler:
- Multiple choice: Standard format with multiple options
- Text input: Students type answers (with flexibility for acceptable variations)
- Image-based questions: Include images in questions or answers
Gimkit’s strength isn’t question variety—it’s what happens around the questions. The game modes and economic systems add engagement layers that Kahoot doesn’t have.
Content Creation Experience
Kahoot’s creator is polished and intuitive. Adding images, videos, and diagrams is straightforward. You can add YouTube videos directly into questions, which is useful for media analysis or listening comprehension.
The interface feels modern and guides you through the process. Adding explanations that appear after answers is easy, which helps with learning—not just testing.
Gimkit’s creator is functional but more basic. You can create questions quickly, and there’s a helpful spreadsheet import option for bulk creation. Adding images works, though the interface isn’t as slick as Kahoot’s.
One notable Gimkit feature: you can import directly from Quizlet. If you or your students already have Quizlet flashcard sets, you can convert them to Gimkit kits in seconds.
Content Libraries
Both platforms offer libraries of pre-made content:
Kahoot has an enormous library. With years of head start and a larger user base, you can find Kahoots on virtually any topic. Quality varies—some are excellent, some are riddled with errors—but the selection is vast.
Gimkit’s library is smaller but growing. You can search for content, but options are more limited, especially for niche topics. You’ll more often create your own kits or import from Quizlet.
Game Modes Compared
This is where differences become dramatic.
Kahoot Game Modes
Kahoot’s core experience is fairly consistent across modes:
- Classic: The standard synchronized experience described above
- Team mode: Students join teams and collaborate on answers
- Assign (Challenge): Self-paced individual play for homework.
- Live: The real-time classroom experience.
Kahoot has added some variations like “special events” with themed visuals, but fundamentally, the gameplay remains synchronized question-by-question competition.
Gimkit Game Modes
Gimkit offers more variety:
- Classic: Self-paced with the upgrade economy
- Team Mode: Teams compete collectively
- Trust No One: Social deduction with secret impostors (Among Us style)
- The Floor is Lava: Spatial navigation with rising lava.
- Humans vs. Zombies: Infection-spreading gameplay
- Boss Battles: Whole-class cooperation against a computer boss
- Dig It Up: Excavation/discovery mechanics
- Don’t Look Down: Tower climbing
- Tag: Domination: Territory control
- Draw That: Pictionary-style drawing game
- Snowbrawl: Seasonal snowball fight mode
These modes feel genuinely different from each other. Trust No One is a completely different experience from Boss Battles, which feels nothing like Classic. This variety keeps the platform fresh and allows matching modes to different classroom needs.
Winner for variety: Gimkit, decisively. Kahoot is essentially one experience with minor variations. Gimkit offers fundamentally different games.
Pacing and Energy
Kahoot’s Energy
There’s nothing quite like a Kahoot session firing on all cylinders. The countdown music builds tension. Students lean forward as time runs out. Cheers erupt when scores update. The leaderboard reveals create genuine excitement.
This energy comes from the synchronized experience. Everyone shares the same moments. The whole class reacts together.
However, this energy requires:
- A functional projector or main display
- Students who can handle the pressure
- Questions at an appropriate difficulty so everyone can participate
- Enough students to create a competitive atmosphere
When conditions aren’t right—the technology struggles, students are anxious, or the class is small—Kahoot can feel flat.
Gimkit’s Engagement
Gimkit’s engagement is different—more sustained but less explosive. Students stay focused for extended periods, heads down, grinding through questions to build their virtual wealth. The strategic layer keeps things interesting beyond pure content.
You won’t get the same whole-class celebratory moments. But you might get 25 minutes of intense, focused practice where every student is working at their own level without anxiety about keeping pace.
Gimkit’s energy works even with:
- No main display needed (though it helps)
- Anxious students who can work without time pressure
- Very small or very large groups
- Widely varied ability levels
Kahoot wins for peak excitement. Gimkit wins for sustained, low-anxiety engagement.
Student Experience and Accessibility
Pressure and Anxiety
This difference matters enormously for some classrooms.
Kahoot’s timed format creates pressure. Some students thrive on it. Others freeze. Students with test anxiety, processing speed differences, or reading challenges may struggle with the countdown format. By the time they’ve fully read and processed the question, faster classmates have already answered.
The public leaderboard adds social pressure. Being at the bottom of a visible ranking can feel humiliating, especially for struggling students.
Gimkit’s self-paced format reduces pressure. Students can take whatever time they need. Nobody knows how quickly or slowly someone is working. There’s no public moment of exposure.
The leaderboard exists but feels less punitive—students at the bottom are still earning money, still playing, still progressing. And teachers can hide leaderboards entirely.
For classrooms with significant anxiety issues, learning differences, or mixed ability levels, Gimkit’s pacing is often more inclusive.
Reading and Processing
Kahoot requires looking at two screens—the main display for question text and the device for answer buttons. This split attention can be challenging for students with visual processing issues, attention challenges, or physical seating limitations.
Gimkit puts everything on one device. Questions and answers appear together. Students control their own experience without needing to coordinate visual attention.
Device Requirements
Both work on phones, tablets, and computers. Both require internet connections.
Kahoot traditionally requires a main display for the teacher, though “Student-paced challenges” work without one.
Gimkit can run entirely on student devices without a main display, though having one helps with communication and troubleshooting.
Data and Assessment
What Kahoot Tells You
Kahoot provides reports including:
- Overall accuracy per question
- Which questions were hardest
- Individual student results
- Response time data
- Downloadable spreadsheet reports
The analytics are useful for identifying which concepts need reteaching. You can see at a glance which questions stumped the class.
What Gimkit Tells You
Gimkit’s analytics include:
- Question accuracy rates
- Individual student performance
- Time played
- Questions answered
- Detailed breakdowns of which questions each student missed
The data is solid for formative assessment purposes.
Assessment Quality
Here’s an important caveat for both platforms: neither should be your only assessment method.
Both platforms measure recognition and recall in a gamified context. They don’t measure extended thinking, writing ability, creativity, or application in authentic contexts. They’re useful formative tools, not comprehensive assessments.
Kahoot’s speed component particularly skews data—a student might know the answer but run out of time, or guess quickly and get lucky. Accuracy data should be interpreted carefully.
Gimkit’s repetition means students see the same questions multiple times, which inflates accuracy as games progress. The learning is real, but final accuracy rates reflect practice, not initial understanding.
Use both platforms for practice and engagement. Use other methods for definitive assessment.
Pricing Comparison
Both platforms offer free tiers and paid upgrades. But the value proposition differs.
Kahoot Pricing
Free (Basic):
- Create Kahoots with up to 10 participants in live games.
- Access to question types varies by plan.
- Limited features
Kahoot+ (Paid tiers):
- Multiple paid tiers ranging roughly $5-15/month for individual teachers
- School and district pricing available
- Advanced question types, more participants, and additional features
- Reports and analytics expand with higher tiers.
The free tier is limited enough that many teachers find upgrading necessary for practical classroom use, particularly with larger classes.
Gimkit Pricing
Free:
- Unlimited students per game
- Limited to Classic game mode
- Basic kit creation
- Limited plays per teacher account
Gimkit Pro (Paid):
- Approximately $10-15/month for teachers (pricing varies)
- All game modes unlocked.
- Advanced features
- Unlimited plays
- School pricing available
The free tier is more usable for actual classroom instruction than Kahoot’s, but the limited game modes mean you’re missing Gimkit’s biggest selling point.
Value Assessment
Both platforms push you toward paid plans for full functionality. Whether that’s worth it depends on your usage frequency and budget.
Schools that negotiate institutional licenses often get better value than individual teacher subscriptions. Check with your administration before purchasing personally.
If you only need occasional use, the free tiers of both can work. For regular integration, paid plans on either platform are usually worth it.
Ease of Use
For Teachers
Kahoot is extremely intuitive. The interface is polished, the process is clear, and most teachers can run a game successfully within minutes of their first attempt. Creating content is straightforward.
Gimkit has a slight learning curve, primarily because there are more options. Choosing between game modes, understanding the various settings, and navigating different features takes some exploration. But it’s not difficult—just more extensive.
For Students
Kahoot’s learning curve is nearly zero. Enter code, pick a name, tap colored buttons. Done.
Gimkit is slightly more complex because of the economic mechanics. Students need to understand earning money, buying upgrades, and making strategic decisions. Most figure it out quickly, but it’s not quite as immediately obvious as Kahoot.
For very young students or first-time users, Kahoot’s simplicity is an advantage.
Best Use Cases: When to Use Each
After years with both platforms, here’s when I reach for each:
Choose Kahoot When:
You want high-energy whole-class moments. Nothing matches Kahoot for creating shared excitement. End-of-unit celebrations, Friday reviews, or whenever you need to boost energy.
You need quick, focused sessions. Kahoot games can run 5-10 minutes for a fast check-in. The structure keeps things tight.
You’re introducing game-based learning. Kahoot’s simplicity makes it a great entry point for students and teachers new to educational gaming.
You want to include media. Kahoot’s integration with videos and the ability to pause for discussion make it better for media-rich content.
The content is at one difficulty level. When all students can reasonably answer within the time limits, Kahoot’s pace works well.
You want formative polling or discussion. Kahoot’s poll and brainstorm features are genuinely useful for gathering class opinions.
You’re teaching synchronously online. For remote instruction, Kahoot’s shared experience can recreate some classroom energy through video conferencing.
Choose Gimkit When:
You want maximum content repetition. Gimkit’s cycling through questions repeatedly means more practice per session. For content that needs drilling, it’s more effective.
You have anxious students or a wide ability ranges. The self-paced nature lets everyone work comfortably. No one is exposed for being slow.
You want sustained focus, not just excitement. Gimkit can run 20-30 minutes with engaged students. The strategic layer keeps things interesting beyond pure questions.
You need variety in game modes. If you use game-based learning frequently, Gimkit’s mode variety prevents fatigue.
You’re assigning independent practice. The self-paced nature works well for homework or study sessions.
You want cooperative gameplay. Boss Battles and similar modes create collaboration rather than competition.
You have limited display capability. Gimkit runs entirely on student devices without requiring a main screen.
The Honest Drawbacks
Neither platform is perfect. Here’s what frustrates me about each:
Kahoot Frustrations
The time pressure excludes some students. I’ve watched struggling readers consistently finish last, not because they don’t know the content, but because they can’t read fast enough. It’s demoralizing.
The speed-based scoring rewards clicking fast over thinking carefully. Quick guessers sometimes beat thoughtful students.
It requires functional display technology. When the projector dies, so does your Kahoot session.
The free tier is increasingly limited. Features that used to be free get moved behind paywalls over time.
The energy can become chaotic. Some classes go from excited to out-of-control, especially with younger students. Management matters.
Gimkit Frustrations
The economic mechanics can distract from learning. Some students focus entirely on earning money and buying upgrades, barely noticing whether they got questions right or wrong.
There’s less whole-class community. Students are in their own worlds on their devices. You lose the shared experience that Kahoot creates.
Some game modes prioritize fun over learning. Trust No One is incredibly engaging, but doesn’t deliver the same content practice as Classic mode.
The upgrade system can feel unfair. Students who pull ahead early gain advantages that widen the gap. Late joiners start at a permanent disadvantage.
It’s easy to overuse. Because it’s less disruptive than Kahoot, teachers sometimes run Gimkit too frequently, dulling its effectiveness.
What Students Actually Prefer
I’ve asked students many times which they like better. The answers vary, but patterns emerge:
Competitive, confident students often prefer Kahoot. They love the leaderboard, the speed challenge, and the public recognition for winning.
Anxious or struggling students often prefer Gimkit. The lack of time pressure and public exposure feels safer.
Students who enjoy strategy games gravitate toward Gimkit. The economic layer appeals to the same impulses as video games they play at home.
Students who crave social energy lean toward Kahoot. The whole-class experience feels more like an event.
After extended exposure, many students prefer whatever is used less frequently. Novelty matters. If you use Kahoot every week, they’ll get excited when you switch to Gimkit, and vice versa.
The wisest approach is probably having both in your toolkit and rotating based on purpose.
Can You Use Both?
Absolutely—and I’d recommend it.
They serve different purposes well enough that having both makes sense. Use Kahoot when you want energy and shared moments. Use Gimkit when you want sustained practice and lower anxiety.
Some teachers even use both in the same unit:
- Gimkit early on for repeated practice and learning
- Kahoot later for an exciting final review
This leverages each platform’s strengths.
Making the Final Decision
If you can only choose one due to budget or simplicity, here’s my framework:
Choose Kahoot if:
- You value whole-class energy and shared experiences.
- Your students generally handle competition well.
- You want quick, focused review sessions.
- You use gamified learning occasionally rather than constantly.
- You appreciate polished design and simplicity.
Choose Gimkit if:
- You have students who struggle with time pressure.
- You want more sustained practice sessions.
- You’ll use the platform frequently and need variety.
- Inclusion and accessibility are priorities.
- You appreciate the strategic depth.
Choose both if:
- Your budget allows
- You recognize that different situations call for different tools.
- You want maximum flexibility.
A Note on Alternatives
While Kahoot and Gimkit dominate this space, other platforms exist:
- Quizizz: Similar to Kahoot but self-paced (an interesting middle ground)
- Blooket: Another game-based platform with unique modes
- Quizlet Live: Good for vocabulary and term-focused review
- Socrative: More assessment-focused, less gamified
Competition is good for teachers—it drives innovation and keeps features improving on all platforms.
Final Thoughts
The Gimkit vs. Kahoot debate doesn’t have a universal answer because it’s the wrong question. The real question is: what do you need for this particular lesson, this particular class, at this particular moment?
Both platforms are excellent at what they’re designed to do. Kahoot creates excitement, shared experiences, and efficient whole-class review. Gimkit creates sustained engagement, anxiety-free practice, and strategic depth.
The best teachers I know don’t pick a side—they pick the right tool for each situation. Sometimes that’s Kahoot. Sometimes it’s Gimkit. Sometimes it’s neither.
Use your professional judgment. Try both. Pay attention to which students thrive and struggle with each platform. Adjust accordingly.
And don’t let the technology overshadow the teaching. Both platforms are just tools. The learning happens because of your question design, your content alignment, and your classroom facilitation—not because of which game you chose.
Now go play some games. Your students are waiting.