b10cks vs. Prismic
Slices are a good idea, and b10cks builds on the same composable model. The cost sits around them: eight locales even on the $675 plan, seat tiers that run out early, and development environments behind a $3,000 a year add-on.
Unlimited locales. Unlimited editors. From €0 / month.
Credit where it is due
Prismic popularized the slice: a reusable page section that a developer defines and an editor assembles. It shaped how a whole generation of headless systems thinks about structure, and b10cks is downstream of that idea.
Slice Machine is a real workflow too. Define slices in code, sync them to the model, hand editors the assembled set. Live preview and a CDN come with every plan, and the Next.js fit is tight.
Where it costs you
Prismic charges per repository, with hard caps on the things teams use most: languages, people and environments. The caps arrive sooner than most teams expect.
Platinum at $675 a month includes eight locales. Not unlimited, eight. Medium at $150 gives you five. A European product covering eight languages is at Platinum for the locale count alone.
One user on Free, three on Starter, seven on Small at $25, twenty-five on Medium at $150. Unlimited editors start at Platinum. A team of ten is a $150 a month decision.
Development environments are not available below Platinum, and on invoiced plans they still need a $3,000 a year add-on. For teams that actually practise staging, that is a hard number.
Custom roles are gated to the higher plans and SSO is enterprise only. Most organizations with an identity provider and a real editorial hierarchy are pushed into a premium commitment.
Slice Machine keeps the schema in code, so a model change means a deploy and a developer. Fine if that is the workflow you want, blocking if the content team needs to move on its own.
Prismic is closed-source SaaS. There is no version you run yourself and no exit that keeps the platform. b10cks is AGPLv3 and installs on your own server with one command.
Fair is fair
Slice Machine is genuinely good, and schema-as-code is the right call for plenty of teams. The disagreement here is not about the content model. It is about what should be metered.
The rows that actually differ
Visual editing, version history, CDN and image processing land on both sides. The split is in the limits: locales, seats, roles, SSO, environments, and whether you can run the thing yourself at all.
What it actually costs
Prismic runs from Free at one user and two locales, through Starter at $10, Small at $25 for seven users and four locales, Medium at $150 for twenty-five users and five locales, to Platinum at $675 for unlimited users and eight locales. Backups, SSO and custom roles sit at the enterprise end.
Take a normal team: ten editors, six locales, one development environment. Six locales means Platinum, $675 a month, plus $3,000 a year for environments.
The same team on b10cks: €25 a month on Essential. The editors and the locales are not part of the math.
Start free. Build from here.
€0/ month to start
Who should pick which
Prismic is a solid choice when your team works strictly developer-defines, editor-assembles, and you want that schema versioned alongside the components. When you are deep in Next.js and React and want Slice Machine wired into your component library. And when your locale count and your team size both fit inside the plan you are willing to pay for.
Pick b10cks when
You need more than eight languages, or more editors than a tier allows. You want custom roles and SSO without an enterprise contract, development environments without a yearly add-on, and self-hosting as a real option. You want the bill to follow your traffic, not your headcount.
Unlimited
Unlimited
Every plan
AGPLv3
Blocks are the native architecture in b10cks, modelled visually on an infinite canvas. Changes reach editors without a deploy.
Make room for your next build
Every language, every teammate, every feature, on the free plan and on every plan after it.