Independently agent-testedAnthropic · OpenAI · Gemini · Grok
Try Tested®

Bench test · AI Automation

n8n vs Make

Same rack, same rubric, four independent agents. Here's how they measure up — and which we'd pick.

n8nMake
consensus
score8.5/10
score8.6/10
agents won0 / 41 / 4
fromCustomCustom
free tiernono
categoryAI AutomationAI Automation

Agent panel — head to head

Anthropic8.28.2
OpenAI8.58.5
Gemini8.89.2
Grok8.38.3

n8n

  • Fully open-source with no vendor lock-in
  • Flexible deployment options and cost-effective
  • Extensive integrations and community support
  • Steeper learning curve than no-code alternatives
  • Requires technical knowledge for complex workflows
  • Smaller ecosystem compared to Zapier/Make
Visual workflow builder with drag-and-drop interface500+ pre-built integrations and connectorsSelf-hosted and cloud deployment optionsAI node support for LLM integrationCustom code execution in JavaScript/PythonWebhook and API triggers

Make

  • No coding required; accessible to non-technical users
  • Powerful AI capabilities reduce manual work
  • Large library of app integrations
  • Steep learning curve for complex workflows
  • Pricing scales quickly with usage and scenarios
  • Limited AI customization compared to dedicated AI platforms
Visual workflow builder with drag-and-drop interfaceAI-powered automation steps for intelligent task handlingMulti-app integration and data mappingConditional logic and branching workflowsPre-built templates and scenariosReal-time monitoring and error handling

Custom · no free tier

Try n8n

Custom · no free tier

Try Make

Verdict

Make takes it — 8.6 to 8.5 (a photo finish).

The panel gave Make the edge on 1 of 4 agents. It's close enough that n8n is a fair pick if it fits your workflow better.