The Quick Answer
-
Make (Integromat) — Best for non-technical teams, simple integrations, < 10 steps
-
n8n — Best for technical teams, complex logic, self-hosted, AI integrations
-
Custom scripts — Best for unique requirements, high volume, full control
Make (Integromat)
Strengths
- Beautiful visual builder
- 1,500+ pre-built integrations
- Zero infrastructure to manage
- Non-engineers can maintain it
Weaknesses
- Gets expensive at scale (9ドル-29/mo for basic, 99ドル+ for real usage)
- Complex branching logic is awkward
- AI/LLM integrations are limited
- Vendor lock-in
Best for
- Marketing automation (email sequences, social posting)
- CRM sync between tools
- Simple approval workflows
- Teams where a non-engineer needs to maintain it
n8n
Strengths
- Self-hosted = no per-execution costs
- First-class AI agent support
- JavaScript/Python code nodes for custom logic
- Community nodes for niche integrations
- Can run on a 5ドル/mo VPS
Weaknesses
- Requires some technical skill
- UI is less polished than Make
- Self-hosting means you manage uptime
- Fewer native integrations than Make
Best for
- AI-powered workflows (Claude, GPT, embeddings)
- Data processing pipelines
- Workflows with complex branching
- Cost-sensitive teams processing high volume
- Developers who want control
Custom Scripts (Python/Node)
Strengths
- Total control over every aspect
- Best performance at scale
- No platform limitations
- Can do literally anything
Weaknesses
- Highest build cost
- Requires developer to maintain
- No visual monitoring dashboard (unless you build one)
- Harder to hand off to non-technical team members
Best for
- High-volume data processing (1M+ records)
- Unique integrations with no existing connectors
- Real-time event processing
- ML model inference in the pipeline
- When the automation IS the product
Decision Matrix
| Factor |
Make |
n8n |
Custom |
| Setup time |
1 hour |
4 hours |
1-3 days |
| Monthly cost (small) |
29ドル |
0ドル-5 |
5ドル-20 |
| Monthly cost (large) |
299ドル+ |
20ドル |
20ドル-50 |
| AI integration |
Basic |
Great |
Full control |
| Maintenance |
Easy |
Medium |
Hard |
| Scalability |
Limited |
Good |
Best |
| Learning curve |
Low |
Medium |
High |
My Recommendation
Start with n8n for most automation projects. Here's why:
-
Free to start — self-host on any cheap VPS
-
AI-native — first-class Claude and GPT nodes
-
Escape hatch — code nodes let you do anything Make can't
-
Growing fast — the community is shipping new nodes weekly
Use Make when the person maintaining the automation is non-technical.
Use custom scripts when you need raw performance, unique integrations, or the automation is complex enough that a visual builder becomes a liability.
Real-World Example
A client needed: form submission → AI analysis → CRM entry → email notification → Slack alert
-
Make: 49ドル/mo, 2 hours to build, works but AI step is awkward
-
n8n: 0ドル/mo (self-hosted), 3 hours to build, AI step is clean
-
Custom: 0ドル/mo, 8 hours to build, overkill for this use case
We went with n8n. It's been running for 3 months with zero issues.
Not sure which approach fits your workflow? Get an async audit →
Originally published on bmdpat.com. I run a one-person AI agent company and write about what actually works.
Want these in your inbox? Subscribe to the newsletter - no spam, unsubscribe anytime.