Not really. ARs are made by a billion and one different companies, all of whom offer a billion and one different models and then the shooters themselves start modifying the gun. Because there are so many AR builders, they're all trying to stand out, but it's hard to do that when everyone and their sister makes ARs. As a result, ARs are a practically limitless combination, even before aftermarket parts get added.
Soviet designers, however, didn't really fret about making minor modifications as they went along, aside from the troubled early days of AK production. The general rule in the USSR was that it wasn’t worth interrupting production without some major changes (AK-47 to AKM to AK-74 to AK-74M). Likewise, Warsaw Pact allies would set up their factories and then produce the same gun for decades, stopping only to switch production from milled receiver to stamped and then from 7.62x39 to 5.45 (if they opted to make the caliber change). That said, it seemed like every gun designer in the East didn't want to modify the mechanics of the design, but usually added a major design feature to “improve” the AK or at least make it distinctive. Bonus points go to the Hungarians for the AMD, which the layman isn’t likely to identify as an AK. All in all, AKs come in far, far fewer models than ARs and when there are differences, they tend to be something pretty obvious. There are exceptions, particularly where the Soviets or other AK-builders helped to build and run the factory (i.e. Maadi in Egypt makes a near-identical Soviet AKM and Iraqi-made AKs are a clone of the Yugoslav M70 series). Western AK users obviously went their own direction because they usually had to reverse-engineer the design (the Galil) and definitely didn't want their troops walking around with anything that looked like the "bad guys" gun (Finland's Valmet comes to mind).