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 21.1%, down 42.2% compared to last year.
N-able N-central, on the other hand, focuses on Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM), holds 7.9% mindshare, down 12.7% since last year.
Client Desktop Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
ManageEngine Endpoint Central21.1%
Symantec Client Management Suite13.9%
Clarity CA11.6%
Other53.4%
Client Desktop Management
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
N-able N-central7.9%
Kaseya VSA16.4%
NinjaOne11.5%
Other64.2%
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

"The stability is very good."
"The most valuable features of ManageEngine Endpoint Central are patch management and remote access and management."
"The patch management aspect of the solution is the most valuable part for us."
"The mobile functionality is very easy."
"In terms of technical capability, it is doing very well. It is doing better than other industry products. It is at a place where we can compare it with Microsoft products. Its scalability is also good."
"ManageEngine Endpoint Central has significantly simplified my device management practices."
"All of Desktop Central's features are valuable, especially its simplicity."
"The solution is definitely scalable."
"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 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 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."
"N-able N-central is an easy tool to implement with customers."
"N-able N-central has numerous good features. The asset tracking capability is powerful, allowing you to track hardware and software on devices connected to your network. The remote control is smooth, securely enabling remote access to servers and routers. It can be integrated with ticketing systems and other tools like CrowdStrike and N-able EDR for comprehensive network monitoring and security. The automation feature is handy, allowing you to schedule tasks, respond to system triggers, and automate problem resolution, such as handling disk space issues automatically."
"The solution's service is good."
"The most valuable feature of N-able N-central is the many options it has."
 

Cons

"The pricing could be a bit better."
"The technical support could improve response times, especially when immediate assistance is needed."
"The pricing is lower than other well-respected solutions in this category."
"I would like to see more click to complete actions such as - USB lockdown for Mac, the ability to check AV compliance on servers, bit locker controls, printer tracking or print page tracking, self-help for self-healing like "BMC my IT" and more options in the self-service menu other than just software - maybe add integration in ADSelfService at the self-service menu."
"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."
"Their support channel could be better. They're an India-based company. They're based out of India. So, here in the States, support can be difficult when you're dealing with time zone requirements. A more global support channel would be a wise choice for them."
"Many features in Desktop Central are licensed separately. It would be more convenient if they could organize these tools into a single package."
"ManageEngine Endpoint Central setup is a little bit complex at the beginning, but that is normal because we have to set up different aspects of the solution and clean up our organization."
"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."
"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 support from our direct team is very good, but the support from their day-to-day ongoing help desk isn't that good. They have still got some work to do on that, but they have been focusing on that a lot over the last number of years. So, it has gotten a lot better than it was."
"It was previously expensive and tedious to manage different licenses."
"N-central has limited mobile device management (MDM) support, specifically for Android devices. This limitation affected a deal with a client who had numerous Android devices to manage. It would be beneficial if N-central could expand its MDM support to include Android devices."
"The solution's overall integration should be improved."
"Involving AI in the platform could improve it further."
"At this moment, we encounter stability issues with N-able N-central from time to time."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing of the product is not bad compared to the other similar solutions in the market."
"The product is not costly. The product is properly priced, especially for SMBs."
"There are multiple flavors of the app. They have a distributed version for enterprises. It depends on your size. They price it on a per machine basis. 250 or 500 is probably their least amount."
"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."
"I have been using the free version and am in the stage where I have to decide if I will proceed with the paid license, or instead choose another product."
"The licensing is very easy to understand and pricing is right for what you get."
"Affordable for any customer."
"We pay about $250 a year for our license."
"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.
879,853 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Performing Arts
6%
 

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: December 2025.
879,853 professionals have used our research since 2012.