Awwwards alternatives: where to find web design inspiration

For motion, the best Awwwards alternative is Recent, the gallery that now lives at Godly's old address, where websites play as video previews. For landing pages and their sections, Land-book and Lapa Ninja. For taste, SiteInspire and Minimal Gallery. For SaaS products and their sites, Refero and SaaSFrame. For sections you can paste as code, Landingfolio. And for an award of your own, CSS Design Awards.

Awwwards itself is still the reference for something most galleries do not do: it publishes how it judges. The weights are public, every site goes to at least 18 jurors, and each site page lists the votes.

Every gallery on this page shows you finished work and leaves the rebuilding to you. Refero comes closest to handing over values, with style files that write down the colors and the type. Landingfolio is the only one that ships code. None of them tells you how a page moves: the easing curve, the duration, the way scroll drives a film. That is the step Thanor covers, and it appears below as one option among the others, with its limits stated.

How this list was checked#

Every product here was opened on its own site on 9 November 2026. Prices are quoted as each pricing page showed them that day, in the currency it showed, and any price we could not see on the vendor's page is left out. For each gallery we recorded four things:

• what an entry shows: a screenshot, a full-page capture, a video or a live link
• how you search it: by style, page type, section, element or font
• what is free and what is paid
• whether it hands you anything to build from: code, Figma layers or written values

Two things changed recently enough to catch people out. Godly now redirects to Recent, and Httpster has stopped taking submissions. Both are covered below.

Thanor publishes this page and appears in it. It is held to the same four questions as everybody else, including the ones it answers badly.

What Awwwards does well#

Awwwards scores design at 40 percent, usability at 30, creativity at 20 and content at 10. Each site goes to at least 18 jury members, the three scores furthest from the average are dropped, and voting usually runs five days. A site page then shows the score breakdown, every juror's vote, short clips of the animations, the colors in hex, the technology tags and the credits.

The site is larger than the awards. Elements collects clips of loaders, scroll effects, footers and navigation across about 50 categories, Collections are hand-picked daily, and the Academy sells courses. At the time of writing:

• Submission: €65 for one website, or €150 with a year of User Pro.
• Membership: Basic at €6 a month and Professional at €12.50 a month, both billed annually; Professional includes a free annual submission.
• Courses: single Academy courses were listed at €9.99.

People look elsewhere for three reasons. The winners lean toward agency showcase work, which is a narrow slice of what most people build. A gallery organized around page types finds you twenty pricing sections faster than an awards archive does. And a site page tells you which fonts and colors a site used and shows clips of its motion, but never the timing behind it, which is often the part that won it the award.

Here are three pages where the motion is the design, each shown moving and paired with the values that build it:

The Awwwards-style build guide fills that last gap with the values themselves: the type ladder, the palette and eight motion settings with real durations.

The alternatives at a glance#

Awwwards, eleven alternatives and Thanor. The last column is the one that decides how much work is left after you find what you like.

Best for motion and awards: Recent and CSS Design Awards#

Recent, where Godly went#

If you typed godly website and landed somewhere new, that is expected. godly.website now redirects to Recent, which describes itself as taking the place of Godly with a broader feed. The website feed still behaves the way Godly's did: entries play as video previews, so you see the scroll, the hover and the page transition before you click through to the live site.

Around the websites, Recent adds launch videos, OG images, app screenshots, app icons, a tools list and a job board. Sign-up is free and no paid plan is shown. It is the best free place on this list to watch motion, and like every gallery it stops at the clip. The clip shows that a headline wipes up. The curve and the duration are still yours to work out.

CSS Design Awards#

CSS Design Awards is the closest match to the Awwwards model. It runs eight awards, among them Website of the Day, Month and Year, takes submissions at $50 at the time of writing, and had nominees dated the day we checked. Choose it when what you want from Awwwards is a badge for your own site rather than a place to browse.

Best for landing pages: Land-book, Lapa Ninja and One Page Love#

Land-book#

Land-book is a curated gallery updated daily, and its strength is the way it cuts pages up. Beyond whole websites it keeps separate feeds for sections, mobile, motion, OG images and headlines, and it files pages by type, from landing to pricing to sign-up. A free account gets limited access and three boards. Pro costs $9 a month, or $6 a month billed $72 a year, and adds unlimited access, mobile previews, older versions of each site, screenshot downloads and Copy to Figma.

Lapa Ninja#

Lapa Ninja has collected landing pages since 2015, as full-page screenshots and video recordings, browsable by category and by element. It also lists fonts, third-party Webflow templates and free design books. Pro is $9 a month, cancel anytime, and buys unlimited boards, no ads and early access.

One Page Love#

One Page Love has hand-picked single-page sites since 2008. Rob Hope started it, and in July 2026 it was acquired by Some Studio. You browse by genre, by page section and by typeface, and the site also lists templates for Framer, Webflow, Carrd and Figma, free and premium, with the paid ones we saw priced from $25 to $39. Browsing costs nothing, and a new entry went up the day we checked.

All three answer what does a good pricing section look like faster than Awwwards does. None of them tells you the spacing, the type scale or the hover timing behind it, which is fine for a moodboard and a problem the moment you start building.

Best for taste: SiteInspire, Minimal Gallery and Httpster#

SiteInspire#

SiteInspire is the most carefully filed gallery here. Each site is tagged by style (big type, black and white, minimal), by type (agencies, e-commerce and more), by subject (architecture, art) and by platform, from Webflow and ReadyMag to Shopify. An entry is a screenshot, a date, the designer's profile and a link to the live site. No paid plan is shown. New entries arrive slowly: the newest when we checked was eleven days old.

Minimal Gallery#

Minimal Gallery has run since 2013 and does what the name says: restrained, typographic sites, each a screenshot with a live link. It had entries dated the day we checked, and no price is shown.

Httpster#

Httpster still loads, and its archive of typographic, minimal and brutalist sites is worth an afternoon. It is no longer a live feed, though. Submissions are closed, and the newest entry is from May

1. Brutalism in particular is easier to rebuild once it is

written down as a scale, a grid and border widths.

Taste galleries are where you train your eye, and they teach one lesson fast. The sites you keep saving share a small set of exact decisions about scale, spacing and timing, which is the reason unspecified AI sites all look alike: when nobody makes those decisions, the model makes the average ones.

Best for SaaS and product UI: Refero and SaaSFrame#

Refero#

Refero covers web and iOS products: screens, complete user flows from sign-up to cancellation, and search by UI element, from bento grids to checkouts. Paid plans add a Figma plugin and an MCP server for AI assistants.

Its styles section is the nearest any gallery comes to handing over values. Each style page offers a DESIGN.md with the colors in hex and the type sizes and line heights in pixels. Refero lists what its styles cover as typography, color, layout, spacing, surfaces, components and imagery. Motion is not on the list.

From a European connection, the free tier shows about 3 percent of the collection, Pro is €10 a month billed €120 a year or €15 a month billed quarterly, and a lifetime plan is €250.

SaaSFrame#

SaaSFrame is narrower and deeper: SaaS website pages, product screens, UX patterns and flows, updated weekly, with a search that reads the text inside screenshots. Some screens come with the page's Figma design, to paste as editable layers. The free tier shows three results per filter. Pro is $18 a month, or $15 a month billed $180 a year.

If product screens are what you need, the Mobbin alternatives go through that category in full, including the libraries that have closed or moved.

Best when you want code: Landingfolio#

Landingfolio is the one gallery here that hands you something to build with directly. Next to its landing page inspiration sits a library of sections, each marked free or pro, with a preview and a copy button, in Tailwind CSS, React, Vue, HTML, Figma and Webflow. At the time of writing the All Access Pass is $49 a year or $59 once, with commercial use and 1,000 MCP requests a day.

Code solves a different problem from inspiration. A pricing section in Tailwind gets you a working pricing section, and it arrives with its own spacing, radius and type that you then reconcile with every other section on the page. That reconciling is design work, and it is where most assembled pages start to look assembled: three sections from three sources, each correct, none of them agreeing on a corner radius.

The fix is to decide the system first and pull sections into it, which works with Landingfolio's code and with anything else. A shared radius such as 12px, one type ratio such as 1.25, and one easing curve for every entrance turn a pile of good sections into one page.

What a gallery leaves you to rebuild#

A screenshot carries more than it seems. You can sample its colors, measure its margins and often identify its fonts; Awwwards even prints the hex values. What it cannot carry is time. Here is what a finished hero is made of that no frame shows:

• the easing curve of each entrance, for example cubic-bezier(0.16, 1, 0.3, 1)
• the duration: 1000ms for a reveal against 220ms for a hover
• the stagger between sibling blocks, such as 70ms
• how scroll maps to a film or a 3D scene, and which part of the section plays which frame
• what happens under prefers-reduced-motion
• the media itself: the film, the cut-out and the still, at the right size

A video preview helps with the first four and still hands them to you as a guess. Here is the same hero written down instead, as a short fragment of a specification:

Hero, 100vh, ground #0A0A0A, ink #F2F2F2, one accent #D6FF3F.
Headline clamp(56px, 12vw, 200px), line height 0.88, tracking -0.04em.
Reveal: translateY 48px to 0, clip-path inset(100% 0 0 0) to inset(0),
cubic-bezier(0.16, 1, 0.3, 1), 1000ms, 70ms stagger between lines.
Reduced motion: opacity 1, transform none, clip-path none.

A model given that fragment has very little left to guess, so two runs land close together. A model given a screenshot and the words like this builds its own reading of it, which is why rebuilding a design from a reference goes better from values than from pixels, and why a tool that turns a URL into a brief is worth testing before you trust it. The full set an award-level page uses is in the motion system section of the Awwwards-style guide.

Best when you want to build the site you saw: Thanor#

Thanor sits one step after the galleries. It is a library of website designs, each shown as a live, moving preview, and each with a long, exact prompt. Paste the prompt into Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, Cursor, Lovable, v0 or Bolt and the model builds that site.

The prompt is a full art direction written as values: the palette in hex, the type faces and scale, the spacing, the easing curves and durations, the section order and every interaction, plus hosted films, cut-outs and stills that the built page uses. The designs lean vivid and cinematic, often with a 3D object or a character, and deliberately away from the generic AI look. Two examples of what a full specification produces:

Where Thanor is the wrong pick: it is a curated library, so it will not show you a thousand pricing pages from real companies, and it holds no app screens or user flows. For breadth, Land-book and Refero do that job better. Some designs are free with a free account; the rest need a paid plan, listed on the pricing page. The Thanor MCP lets Claude, ChatGPT or Cursor search the library and pull a design's full art direction without the clipboard.

More designs like these, grouped by technique, are in the best 3D websites and scroll animation website examples.

How to choose an Awwwards alternative#

Start from the question you are asking, then pick the gallery built for it.

1. You want to watch motion before you study it: Recent.
2. You want a badge for your own site: CSS Design Awards, or Awwwards itself.
3. You are designing a landing page section by section: Land-book first, Lapa Ninja second.
4. You want to train your eye on restraint: SiteInspire and Minimal Gallery.
5. You are designing a SaaS product or its site: Refero for written styles, SaaSFrame for depth.
6. You want working sections today: Landingfolio.
7. You want the moving site itself, built by your AI from exact values: Thanor.

Most people end up with two: one gallery for breadth and one source for the build. The galleries are very good at the first job, and none of them was designed for the second.

The verdict#

The galleries are good at what they do, and Awwwards still sets the standard for showing how a site was judged. Recent is the best free way to watch motion now that Godly has become it. Land-book is the strongest paid gallery for landing pages, at $9 a month. Refero is the closest to writing values down, with style files that stop at color, type and layout. Landingfolio is the pick when the deliverable is a section of code.

What none of them does is the step that turns a reference into your site. A clip shows that a headline wipes up; it never says 1000ms on cubic-bezier(0.16, 1, 0.3, 1). A template goes the other way and hands you a finished page in somebody else's proportions, which is the trade Framer templates make.

So use the galleries to decide what you like, then take that decision to a specification. MotionSites and the other prompt libraries are the category that does this. Thanor is our entry in it: designs you watch moving first, then a prompt your AI builds from. Elsewhere in the category, BuildPromptKit hosts a live demo built from each of its prompts.

Start with one free design#

Open Vesperion and copy its prompt; it is free with an account. Read the prompt before you paste it anywhere, because it shows on one page what no gallery publishes: every value behind the motion you just watched. Then paste it into Claude or Cursor and compare what comes back with the last screenshot you saved. When you want more, the library holds the rest.