Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

ManageEngine Endpoint Central vs N-able N-central comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
69
Ranking in other categories
Client Desktop Management (1st), Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) (3rd), Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) (2nd)
N-able N-central
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Systems Management solutions, they serve different purposes. ManageEngine Endpoint Central is designed for Client Desktop Management and holds a mindshare of 19.6%, down 41.3% compared to last year.
N-able N-central, on the other hand, focuses on Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM), holds 7.7% mindshare, down 12.6% since last year.
Client Desktop Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
ManageEngine Endpoint Central19.6%
KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA)12.1%
Symantec Client Management Suite12.0%
Other56.3%
Client Desktop Management
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
N-able N-central7.7%
Kaseya VSA15.8%
NinjaOne11.4%
Other65.1%
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
 

Featured Reviews

SR
Manager - IT at Milliman
The user-friendly interface and effective patch management streamline server maintenance
There are times when we have a particular software installed in our system, but we do not receive patches for it from Endpoint Central. The support team mentions that the software may not be updated in their database yet, which requires us to raise a request for their database update. This lack of regular database updates has been an issue. Additionally, Endpoint Central does not support Linux, which makes it challenging to patch Linux machines using commands. Support for Linux, such as CentOS or Ubuntu, would be highly beneficial.
Dimitri V G - PeerSpot reviewer
Team Manager Fiber & Backhaul Solutions Center & South at Telenet BVBA
Maximizing operational efficiency with comprehensive monitoring and automation capabilities
There are areas in N-able N-central that could be improved. We always started it from the basic purpose of monitoring hardware, where vendors such as HP and Dell try to sell their own services which monitor and provide a dashboard, which is their logic. They want to make their own recurring revenue on that. We notice that SNMP has had a good run and still sometimes is used, but it's becoming an issue to maintain the same capabilities because HP makes it unreliable or even removes certain features that we used to be able to validate redundant array of independent disks. Our service that has been running for 15-20 years suddenly is not working anymore because HP decided in generation 10 plus and above, or generation 10 hardware in servers, storage controllers particularly, they just didn't put the SNMP OIDs anymore. We are now following that market change or business change in hardware monitoring and the future is Redfish, REST API, IPMI type of monitoring with the REST API and Redfish being most common. We have to do the effort ourselves because Enable is not really strategically going there because I assume there's not much money to make to improve that or to convince customers to start with their product. That issue could be better if they would be more prepared for that change and give us customers more tools, preconfigured, pre-available custom services for Redfish, REST API, where we just have to put a few items username, password and address and some dots and commas, but that we don't have to reinvent the wheel, which we are doing at the moment. We are using HP iLO commandlets and REST APIs for Aruba. Dell is making it very hard to monitor their hardware. If it has an iDRAC, I can manage it and monitor it, but if it's something that's less common or due to the portfolio, they have done a good job at not exposing information about health. We would just want to have a red or a green dot that indicates if this device is healthy or not healthy. Since nobody's investing in SNMP because it's a liability in security, they should invest in making a REST API and preferably also do the work on making it easy to pull or push information. That's something that the industry in general and Enable in particular could do a significant job to help us monitor.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Everything is easily centralized and managed under this one product."
"One of the benefits of Desktop Central is it made the provisioning process simpler because now we have a provisioning package. We have around 1,500 laptops at the moment and all these PCs were provisioned by a provisioning package. In the provisioning package, we have integrated every aspect of renaming, deploying applications, patching, etc., so we simply execute the provisioning package and as soon as it's executed, it will install the management agent. Once the agent is installed, it will take care of all the tasks, so we don't have to sit in front of the computer to prepare the machine. This really helps us to provision the PC quickly with our agent."
"We use the product to know about our assets and manage remote support."
"ManageEngine Endpoint Central has its own database to check patches without needing to go to the vendor."
"The mobile functionality is very easy."
"ManageEngine Endpoint Central is straightforward to use and implement."
"The GUI of Endpoint Central is very user-friendly, which simplifies the process of training new users."
"Page management and ADA integrations are the most valuable features of ManageEngine Endpoint Central."
"The most helpful features of N-able N-central include providing a single pane of glass for many insights in an environment regarding their patching, their assets, their devices in general, and the active issues that they show."
"The most valuable features of N-central are its ease of deployment and ease of use."
"The solution's service is good."
"N-able N-central is an easy tool to implement with customers."
"The transition to N-able N-central was very smooth; we were confident that our migration would not affect any operations, and it was easy to migrate our clients into the new solutions."
"The most valuable feature of N-able N-central is the many options it has."
"It's a very robust product. They're continuing to invest and put new enhancements into the product. They're very open about what their roadmap is, which is very good for us because then as a business, we can plan."
"The support is at a good level. So normally, we can always get to a solution when we are stuck with some monitoring problems that we encounter."
 

Cons

"The support could be faster."
"The Deployment scheduler needs updating to support various methods for deployment."
"The reports provided by the product are an area of concern where improvements are required. The visibility provided by the reports is not very attractive."
"I would like to have the option to install the agent remotely."
"ManageEngine Endpoint Central’s scalability could be improved."
"There are times when we have a particular software installed in our system, but we do not receive patches for it from Endpoint Central."
"The pricing could be a bit better."
"The solution lacks some configuration."
"It was previously expensive and tedious to manage different licenses."
"N-able N-central could improve the remote access, my technicians have complained about it. They have used other free tools instead to compensate, such as TeamViewer. Additionally, when using remote access on the web, it is lacking reports."
"The industry has moved towards Redfish for out-of-band and in-band monitoring, yet N-able N-central still relies on older protocols like SNMP."
"The solution's overall integration should be improved."
"We have to do the effort ourselves because Enable is not really strategically going there because I assume there's not much money to make to improve that or to convince customers to start with their product."
"The integration with other applications could be better."
"There is room for improvement in the development of custom monitoring services."
"At this moment, we encounter stability issues with N-able N-central from time to time."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Choose wisely between the Professional and Enterprise editions, based on your needs."
"We pay about $250 a year for our license."
"We had perpetual licenses. The cost was around 36,000, and then you'd have the yearly maintenance fee of 2,000 or 3,000."
"The pricing is average."
"The product is not expensive."
"Affordable for any customer."
"Could provide more services on the standard license"
"The price could be cheaper."
"N-able N-central is not an expensive solution."
"The pricing and licensing are average, almost six out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Client Desktop Management solutions are best for your needs.
882,160 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Computer Software Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Performing Arts
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business25
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise35
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

How to choose between ManageEngine Desktop Central and Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager (formerly SCCM)?
ManageEngine Desktop Central is very easy to set up, is scalable, stable, and also has very good patch management. What I like most about ManageEngine is that I can log on to every PC very easily a...
What do you like most about ManageEngine Endpoint Central?
Well, what we like is that it catch actually a lot of features constantly upgrading. So all the three maybe there there were some features as the tenant on the earliest version. Now it's it's almos...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ManageEngine Endpoint Central?
I would rate the pricing as seven; it is quite expensive from my point of view for ManageEngine Endpoint Central.
What needs improvement with N-able N-central?
The MSP part of N-able N-central has evolved over the years. They have been trying to move from professional or network server and desktop licensing to make it more comprehensive. With professional...
What is your primary use case for N-able N-central?
We have been dealing with Enable EDR and N-able N-central, which is a management center. It's the NOC solution that we are currently running our asset management on. We are managing tasks in that e...
What advice do you have for others considering N-able N-central?
There's a new node for N-able N-central which they have addressed. Our outstanding items include reviewing our pricing and partnership level, which can provide additional benefits when we exceed 10...
 

Also Known As

ManageEngine Desktop Central, Desktop Central, ManageEngine Desktop Management MSP
SolarWinds N-central, SolarWinds MSP N-central
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Strathallan School, BMI Healthcare, Comercial Kywi, First Priority Federal Credit Union, Gerab National Enterprises
Premier Technology Solutions
Find out what your peers are saying about ManageEngine, Broadcom, Quest Software and others in Client Desktop Management. Updated: January 2026.
882,160 professionals have used our research since 2012.