If Zapier is the beginner-friendly option, n8n and Make are the two tools competing for the same next tier of user — people who’ve outgrown simple two-step Zaps and need real branching logic without writing a full application. Having run both in production, here’s where they genuinely differ.
Billing Model: Executions vs Credits
- n8n charges per execution — one full workflow run, regardless of how many nodes it contains.
- Make charges per credit (operation) — every individual module action (a Google Sheets write, an API call, one loop iteration) consumes one credit. A workflow with 6 modules run 1,000 times burns roughly 6,000 credits.
This means Make’s advertised “1,000 free operations” disappears much faster than it sounds once your scenario has more than 2-3 modules, while n8n’s execution-based free tier (self-hosted) has no volume ceiling at all.
Pricing Side-by-Side
| n8n | Make | |
|---|---|---|
| Free tier | Unlimited (self-hosted) | 1,000 credits/mo (hosted) |
| Entry plan | ~$20-24/mo (2,500 executions) | ~$9-11/mo (10,000 credits) |
| Mid-tier | ~$50-60/mo (10,000 executions) | ~$16-19/mo (10,000 credits, priority) |
| Integrations | 400+ | 2,000+ |
Both vendors update pricing regularly — confirm current figures on their official pricing pages before deciding. Numbers above reflect 2026 approximations.
On paper, Make’s hosted entry plan looks cheaper than n8n Cloud. But because Make counts every module as a credit, a workflow-heavy operation can burn through 10,000 credits far faster than 2,500 n8n executions would be consumed by the equivalent workflows.
Visual Builder Experience
Make’s canvas is widely considered more visually polished — circular nodes connected by clean flowing lines make it easier to see your automation’s shape at a glance. n8n’s canvas is more utilitarian and boxier, but arguably easier to debug since each node’s input/output data is inspectable inline as you build.
Code Access and AI Workflows
This is n8n’s clearest advantage. It ships native LLM, vector store, and AI agent nodes designed specifically for building autonomous, decision-making workflows — not just data-moving ones. Make offers a code module too (2 credits per second of execution), but its AI tooling feels bolted on rather than built-in.
If your roadmap includes AI agents, RAG pipelines, or LLM-driven decision branches, n8n is the more natural fit.
Self-Hosting
n8n is fully open-source and can be self-hosted for free with no execution cap. Make is closed-source and hosted-only — there is no self-hosted option at any price. If data residency, cost control at scale, or full infrastructure ownership matter to you, n8n is the only one of the two that offers it.
Which One Should You Choose?
Choose Make if: you want the most visually intuitive builder, your workflows are lighter (fewer modules per scenario), and you don’t need self-hosting or heavy AI-agent functionality.
Choose n8n if: you want the option to self-host, you’re building AI-driven or agent-style workflows, or your scenarios involve many modules per run where credit-based billing would add up fast.
Curious how both stack up against the market leader? Read our full n8n vs Zapier comparison next.
Disclosure: Some links on this page are affiliate links. If you sign up through them, we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.