Comparison · Updated May 2026

PatentDrawingAI vs DeepIP: drawings-only tool or BigLaw drafting suite?

DeepIP is an enterprise drafting platform pitched at Am Law 100 firms, with a Word add-in that includes a drawings module. PatentDrawingAI is a focused drawings-only tool with public $19/mo pricing. Different problems; different buyers.

By PatentDrawingAI
Published May 11, 2026
Updated May 11, 2026
Home/Comparisons/PatentDrawingAI vs DeepIP

DeepIP and PatentDrawingAI both have "AI" and "patent" in the value prop, but they're built for different buyers. DeepIP is a Word-embedded drafting suite that includes drawings generation as one of several features, sold to law firms with multi-attorney drafting workflows. PatentDrawingAI is a drawings-only tool that an inventor or solo attorney can sign up for in 90 seconds for $19/month, no sales call required.

This page is built from each company's published information as of May 2026. Where pricing or feature data isn't public, we say so rather than guess.

The 30-Second Answer

PatentDrawingAI is the right pick if you want focused drawings-only AI with transparent pricing ($19–$399/mo, ~$2–$5 per drawing), self-serve sign-up, and no need for a Word integration or full drafting suite.

DeepIP is the right pick if you're a patent attorney at a mid-to-large law firm where Microsoft Word is the drafting environment, you need SOC 2 + GDPR compliance posture, and your firm wants to standardize on one platform that handles drawings, claim drafting, and prior-art search together.

The honest catch: DeepIP doesn't publish drawings-specific pricing. The drafting suite reportedly runs $350–$420 per user per month based on third-party listings. For a solo attorney or inventor, the friction of "schedule a demo" plus the price gap usually points elsewhere.

Side-by-Side Overview

PatentDrawingAI

$19 – $399 / mo

~$2–$5 effective per drawing

  • Category: drawings-only AI tool
  • Pricing: public, four tiers, self-serve checkout
  • Buy flow: credit card, no sales call
  • Integration: standalone web app
  • Input: sketches, photos, CAD renders
  • Output: §1.84-compliant line art (multi-page PDF, PNG zip, SVG zip)
  • Drawing set: assembles multi-sheet sets with auto-numbering and §1.84 validation
  • Drafting features: none
  • Best for: inventors, solo attorneys, SMB IP firms

DeepIP

Pricing not public

~$350–$420/seat/mo (per third-party listings)

  • Category: AI drafting suite (drawings included)
  • Pricing: drawings hidden; suite via contact-sales
  • Buy flow: demo request → enterprise contract
  • Integration: Microsoft Word add-in
  • Input: sketches, photos, flowcharts, diagrams
  • Output: patent figures + drafted application content
  • Drafting features: claims, spec, prior-art search included
  • Best for: Am Law 100, Fortune 500 in-house IP teams

Pricing in Detail

PatentDrawingAI — published, all tiers visible

PlanMonthlyDrawings includedPer-drawing
Starter$19~5~$3.80
Pro$79~25~$3.16
Firm$199~80~$2.49
Team$399~200~$2.00

DeepIP — drawings pricing not published

DeepIP's drawings-specific page (deepip.ai/products/patent-drawings-generation) does not publish per-drawing or per-seat pricing for the drawings module. The buy flow is "Get Started — Free" leading to a sign-up where pricing is disclosed during a demo or sales conversation.

Third-party software-comparison sites (G2, software directories) list DeepIP's drafting suite at approximately $350–$420 per user per month, typically with annual commits. This figure is not on DeepIP's own site and should be verified via demo. Whether drawings-only access exists at a lower tier isn't documented publicly.

Why pricing transparency matters

For law firms with procurement processes, contact-sales pricing is normal — it's how vendors price-discriminate by firm size and seat count. For solo attorneys, in-house counsel buying off-the-shelf tools, or inventors handling their own filings, "schedule a demo to learn the price" adds 1–2 weeks of friction that a $19/month self-checkout doesn't.

The Product Scope Difference

The biggest practical difference between these two tools isn't the AI quality — it's the breadth of what they're trying to do. Mapping that out clearly:

What PatentDrawingAI does

  • Takes a sketch, photo, or CAD render
  • Produces a USPTO §1.84-compliant patent drawing in 1–3 minutes
  • Lets you edit via plain-language commands ("make line weight heavier," "add a callout for feature 7")
  • Exports as PDF, PNG zip, or SVG zip ready for USPTO Patent Center upload
  • That's the entire product surface area

What DeepIP does

  • Drawings: converts sketches, photos, flowcharts, and diagrams into patent-ready figures inside Microsoft Word
  • Claim drafting: AI-assisted claim generation and refinement
  • Specification drafting: auto-generated spec language tied to claims
  • Prior-art search and analysis: integrated within the drafting workflow
  • Multi-domain coverage: mechanical, electronics, biotech/life sciences, software, chemistry
  • Compliance posture: SOC 2, GDPR, encrypted Azure deployment, no retention of drawings or specifications post-processing
  • In-app label editor: click any reference numeral and the system renames/renumbers it across spec, claims, and figures simultaneously

Feature Comparison

Here's how the two tools stack up across the key dimensions that matter when you're picking one:

CapabilityPatentDrawingAIDeepIPVerdict
Pricing transparency4 tiers publicDrawings hidden; suite contact-salesPatentDrawingAI
Self-serve sign-upYes (credit card)Demo requiredPatentDrawingAI
Microsoft Word integrationNo (standalone web app)Yes — native Word add-inDeepIP
Generates patent figuresYes — primary productYes — feature within suiteEven on output
Drafts claims and specNoYesDeepIP
Prior-art search built-inNoYesDeepIP
USPTO §1.84 complianceAuto-formattedAuto-formattedEven
Drawing set assembly + §1.84 validationYes — multi-sheet sets with §1.84(t) numbering, sight-area checks (§1.84(g)), cross-figure label consistency (§1.84(p)(5)), A4/Letter toggleCross-figure renaming inside Word; specific §1.84 validation not publicly documentedPatentDrawingAI (explicit validation)
Output formatsMulti-page PDF (filing-ready), PNG zip, SVG zip (vector, editable)Word document with figures embeddedDifferent fits
Multi-domain (biotech, chemistry, etc.)Mechanical / electronic / software primary5 domains explicitly: mechanical, electronics, biotech, software, chemistryDeepIP
SOC 2 / GDPR postureStandard SaaS postureSOC 2 + GDPR compliant; encrypted Azure; no post-processing retentionDeepIP
Cross-figure reference-numeral syncPer-drawingCross-figure renaming across spec, claims, figuresDeepIP
Free trialFirst drawing free, no card'Get Started — Free' CTA on drawings pageBoth have free entry
Standalone drawings without draftingYesDrawings live within drafting workflowPatentDrawingAI
Cost for ~25 drawings/month$79 (Pro)~$350–$420/seat/mo (whole suite)PatentDrawingAI (4–5× cheaper)

Workflow Comparison

Filing one utility patent drawing — PatentDrawingAI

  1. Sign up with email + credit card (or skip the card and use the free first-drawing tier)
  2. Upload sketch, photo, or CAD render
  3. AI applies §1.84 formatting; line drawing produced in 1–3 minutes
  4. Refine via plain-language editor commands
  5. Export as PDF, PNG zip, or SVG zip; upload to USPTO Patent Center

Filing one utility patent drawing — DeepIP

  1. Schedule a demo with DeepIP sales
  2. Negotiate enterprise contract (typically 1–4 weeks)
  3. Install the Microsoft Word add-in across your firm's seats
  4. Inside Word, draft your claims and spec using DeepIP's AI
  5. Generate the figure inline with the drafting workflow — drawings + spec stay in sync
  6. Export the Word document or finalize within Word for USPTO submission

The DeepIP workflow is purpose-built for attorneys whose drafting environment is Microsoft Word — which describes most patent attorneys. The PatentDrawingAI workflow is purpose-built for users who don't want to live inside a single platform and want drawings as a focused, fast piece of the broader workflow.

Cost Math for a Typical Firm

Per-drawing cost is one number. Annual firm-level cost is the number procurement actually evaluates. Below are three firm-size scenarios. Two important caveats before reading: (1) DeepIP suite pricing covers drafting, drawings, and prior-art search together — so comparing it head-to-head against a drawings-only tool is not strictly apples-to-apples; the suite does more. (2) For a true drawings-only comparison, the relevant alternative is a patent illustration firm, which we include below.

Firm scenarioDrawings volumePatentDrawingAI (drawings only)Illustration firm (apples-to-apples)DeepIP suite (drafting + drawings + search)
Solo attorney
20 apps/year × 6 sheets
~120 drawings/yrPro $79/mo = $948/yrPatent Drawing Experts at $29/sheet utility ≈ $3,480/yr~$350–$420/seat/mo × 1 seat × 12 ≈ $4,200–$5,040/yr (full suite)
5-attorney boutique
~80 apps/year × 6 sheets
~480 drawings/yrFirm $199/mo = $2,388/yrSNS Patent Drafting at $50/sheet ≈ $24,000/yr~$400/seat/mo × 5 seats × 12 ≈ $24,000/yr (full suite)
10-attorney firm
~150 apps/year × 6 sheets
~900 drawings/yrFirm $199/mo or Team $399/mo = $2,388–$4,788/yrQuickPatents at $100/sheet ≈ $90,000/yr; mid-market $50/sheet ≈ $45,000/yr~$400/seat/mo × 10 seats × 12 ≈ $48,000/yr (full suite)

How to read these numbers honestly

For drawings-only spend: the apples-to-apples comparison is PatentDrawingAI vs. an illustration firm. At the 5-attorney boutique tier, that's $2,388/yr vs. $24,000/yr — a meaningful annual savings if drawings is what you're solving for.

For platform spend: if your firm wants drafting + drawings + prior-art consolidated in one tool, DeepIP delivers all three for the suite cost. Comparing PatentDrawingAI's $2,388/yr to DeepIP's ~$24,000/yr understates DeepIP's value because DeepIP is replacing more tools.

The hybrid math most firms actually do: use PatentDrawingAI for drawings (~$2,400/yr at firm scale) plus your existing drafting workflow (Word, your current tool) plus a separate prior-art tool. Total often lands at $4,000–$8,000/yr for a 5-attorney boutique vs. $24,000/yr for an all-DeepIP setup. Whether that 4–6× cost difference is worth the workflow consolidation is a real procurement question, and the answer varies by firm.

When DeepIP Is Genuinely the Better Fit

This isn't a "PatentDrawingAI is always better" comparison. There are real cases where DeepIP wins:

  • Law firm with 10+ attorneys all drafting in Word: the cross-figure reference-numeral sync alone saves real attorney hours. PatentDrawingAI doesn't replicate this.
  • Firms with strict SOC 2 / GDPR procurement requirements: DeepIP's published compliance posture is more complete than most consumer-facing AI tools.
  • Multi-domain practice (especially biotech and chemistry): DeepIP's life-sciences and chemistry coverage is broader; PatentDrawingAI is strongest on mechanical/electronic/ software inventions.
  • Attorneys who want one AI tool to handle drafting + drawings + prior-art search: reducing the number of tools is genuinely valuable for some firms.
  • Enterprise-scale filing volume: at hundreds of filings per year, the platform-cost difference matters less than workflow integration.

When PatentDrawingAI Is Genuinely the Better Fit

  • Solo inventor or solo attorney: the procurement friction and price floor of DeepIP doesn't make sense at single-user scale.
  • Drafting handled by external attorney: if your patent attorney owns the drafting workflow, you only need drawings — buying a full drafting suite is overkill.
  • Drafting workflow already chosen (Patently Create, Solve Intelligence, or just Word): bolting PatentDrawingAI on for the drawings step is a $79–$199/mo line item; replacing your drafting platform is months of rework.
  • Cost-conscious or budget-constrained: at 25 drawings/month, PatentDrawingAI Pro is ~5× cheaper than DeepIP suite pricing.
  • You want to test drive without a sales call: first drawing free with no card is faster than scheduling and sitting through a demo.

Decision Framework

If your situation matches…Pick
Solo inventor, 1–5 patents/yearPatentDrawingAI Starter ($19)
Solo attorney, 10–25 filings/year, Word-based draftingPatentDrawingAI Pro ($79) or DeepIP if firm budget allows
2–5 attorney boutique, 25–80 filings/yearPatentDrawingAI Firm ($199) plus existing drafting workflow
10+ attorney firm, 100+ filings/year, Am Law adjacentDeepIP suite (drafting + drawings + prior-art search)
Fortune 500 in-house IP teamDeepIP
Biotech / chemistry-heavy practiceDeepIP (broader domain coverage)
Mechanical / electronic / software practiceEither; PatentDrawingAI for cost; DeepIP for integration

Try PatentDrawingAI Free

One drawing free, no credit card. See whether the output meets your firm's standard before subscribing or scheduling demos.

Generate a Free Drawing

Talk to us about firm pricing →

Frequently Asked Questions

Per DeepIP's website, drawings is described as a feature within the broader drafting platform. Whether they offer a drawings-only SKU is not documented publicly. The 'Get Started — Free' CTA on the drawings page leads to sign-up, after which pricing is disclosed via sales. Ask directly during a demo.

Not currently. PatentDrawingAI is a standalone web app — you generate drawings in the web tool, then export PDF, PNG zip, or SVG zip and embed those in your Word document or upload to USPTO Patent Center. If a Word-native workflow is mission-critical, DeepIP's add-in is the better fit.

This is standard for enterprise B2B SaaS targeting law firms — pricing is negotiated based on seat count, firm size, and feature scope. For Am Law 100 and Fortune 500 buyers (DeepIP's stated target), enterprise contracts with custom pricing is the norm. The trade-off is sign-up friction for smaller buyers.

Yes. Per DeepIP's site, the platform is SOC 2 compliant, GDPR compliant, runs on encrypted Microsoft Azure, and does not retain drawings or specifications after processing. For firms with strict procurement compliance requirements, this is documented. PatentDrawingAI's compliance posture meets standard SaaS requirements but isn't currently published with the same level of certification detail.

Both tools claim USPTO §1.84 compliance; both produce drawings the USPTO accepts. Quality varies by source material — both tools work better with cleaner inputs (CAD renders or high-quality photos) than with vague hand sketches. The right test: generate the same drawing in both using your actual source file. PatentDrawingAI's free first-drawing makes this easy on its side; DeepIP requires sign-up.

No. The USPTO evaluates drawings based on whether they meet 37 CFR 1.84 — formatting and disclosure rules — not on the tool used. AI-generated drawings are accepted on the same terms as illustrator-drafted, hand-drawn, or CAD-generated drawings.

This works for some firms. DeepIP handles the routine drafting + figure cases inline with Word; PatentDrawingAI takes over for the harder figures where source material is unconventional or last-mile polish is needed. The cost overhead of adding PatentDrawingAI Pro ($79/mo) on top of DeepIP is small relative to DeepIP's seat cost. Whether it's worth it depends on what fraction of your figures need extra attention.

Related Reading

Sources cited in this article

  1. DeepIP homepage
  2. DeepIP — Patent Drawings Generation product page
  3. DeepIP — Law Firms positioning
  4. 37 CFR 1.84 — Standards for drawings

Based on each competitor's published information at time of writing (May 2026). The "$350–$420/seat/mo" figure for the DeepIP suite is from third-party software directories, not DeepIP's own site, and should be verified via demo before relying on it. Pricing and feature lists may change; verify on the live competitor page before relying on any specific figure.