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

N-able N-central vs N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 2, 2025

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

N-able N-central
Ranking in Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
N-able N-sight Remote Monit...
Ranking in Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) category, the mindshare of N-able N-central is 9.1%, down from 12.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management is 4.6%, down from 5.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
N-able N-central9.1%
N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management4.6%
Other86.3%
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
 

Featured Reviews

Dimitri V G - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Daniel Gombe - PeerSpot reviewer
Remote management and incident handling have improved with customizable alerts and efficient patch management
The best feature in N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management is the ease of use because I can remote into any machine that's under management without having to drive out to the customer all the time. It helps to reduce workflows because I can create scripts that I can automate, so I don't have to have many people working for me. It helps to reduce incident response times because it's a combination of tools that logs incidents to the PSA, creates tickets, and allows us to manage incidents all in one for an MSP. It does improve service delivery because we can see what's wrong with certain devices before even the customer has a problem, allowing us to remedy it with the necessary tools.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 most valuable features of N-central are its ease of deployment and ease of use."
"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."
"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."
"I like the remote connectivity, reporting suite, and patch management module."
"The solution's service is good."
"The reporting for this solution has been most valuable."
"Remote support has been very handy. It also lets us know if there are failing hard drives or Windows issues."
"We like that this solution is in real-time, it gives us real-time monitoring."
"The integrated backup and the scripting are good."
"The solution provides an administration panel where we can see what is happening on our client's stations, such as events, alerts, and all the software installed."
"The network device is a good feature. In a place where you need to monitor your firewall switches, you can add an RMM tool and monitor it on the same screen on the same setup for the same client. Network devices are very good."
"The solution provides complete visibility for the client's infrastructure. Competitors support multiple platforms like Windows and Linux. We designed the agent for our clients, providing network discovery, so there's no need to go to each device individually. It is easy to deploy with a small address range."
"The most valuable aspect of N-able Remote Monitoring & Management is it provides an all-in solution for the different solutions."
 

Cons

"At this moment, we encounter stability issues with N-able N-central from time to time."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Involving AI in the platform could improve it further."
"There is room for improvement in the development of custom monitoring services."
"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 solutions could improve by adding more features."
"The patch management of the solution could improve."
"What could be improved in N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management is the reporting, in particular, the reporting interface and the report generation method. Currently, I don't find it easy to run reports on the solution. Every time, if I want a report on a Windows vulnerability because a client requested that report, I find the process difficult. For example, out of one hundred PCs, I need to get a report on how many PCs have not been updated to a specific patch level. I need to give that report to the CTO or CEO of a particular client organization, and as running the report on N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management isn't easy, sometimes, that makes me doubt the validity of the generated report as well. It depends on each case because I do find some reports to be genuine and 100% correct, but most of the time, I have to ask for help from other engineers, and even collaborating with another engineer to run reports isn't that easy, so reporting needs improvement in N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management. Another room for improvement in the solution is patch management. The user-friendliness of the Take Control feature in N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management also needs improvement, particularly when it's used on multiple computers or displays. Switching between displays isn't as user-friendly on the technician side, so that could be improved by letting you see all displays or monitors all at once, or on a single display, rather than needing to switch from one display to another. As Take Control is on a Windows agent, or running on a client-end device, that feature of N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management could be improved as well. An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is a mobile application, though I'm not familiar if that's already available. As an IT MSP, sometimes I have on-call jobs, and I don't always want to look at the mailbox to see if there's any alert triggered from the devices. If N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management has a mobile application that would allow my team to get push notifications whenever there's downtime or issues, then that would make the solution more reliable. I'd like to get an alert that would pop up from my mobile device, so it would be pretty easy to keep an eye on alerts, and I won't have to check my inbox every time."
"Additionally, N-sight has an anti-human device manager, but it is only for Apple iOS devices, not for Android."
"The SentinelOne integration is not great."
"The product looks a bit old-fashioned."
"Kaseya is a similar product and they have easier scripts. If you want to deploy one software to 100 machines, we need to dig into it and then we need to create the script and work with the support team and then we can deploy that particular script. The pre-built scripted is the one thing that I would definitely like to have improved."
"The reporting could be more customizable. RMM pulls a vast amount of data, but you need to filter through it to get a decent executive report each month. I'm pulling reports all day through the XML file and such to get the information our executive needs. They don't want a 34-megabyte Excel spreadsheet, but the overview only provides limited information, like a basic breakdown."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"N-able N-central is not an expensive solution."
"The pricing and licensing are average, almost six out of ten."
"The product is fairly priced."
"It's expensive and out of our budget."
"As I'm not part of the procurement team and because I'm 100% technical, I'm not that familiar with the costs associated with N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management, but I can say that in my location, particularly here in Sri Lanka, it's more expensive than other RMM solutions. I'm working for an Australian IT MSP, and over there, the solution isn't as expensive, but where I'm located, it is, so this is the reason why sometimes, clients don't go with N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management. Licensing cost is also the reason why my organization is looking into Kaseya RMM. My current organization merged with another organization that's using both Kaseya RMM and Connectwise."
"We use SolarWinds RMM on a pay-as-you-go monthly basis, so the cost can be highly variable because it depends on a few factors such as how many devices you need to support and what extra features you want to use. The more devices you have, the more you'll pay, and the same goes for extras."
"There is a license required for this solution."
"Out clients pay monthly for the license of N-able Remote Monitoring & Management."
"The solution is not very expensive."
"I haven't paid a whole lot of attention to that since I set it up. It has per-user licensing. If I remember it correctly, it worked out to about $10 a month per user. There were no additional costs. It was pretty straightforward and simple."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) solutions are best for your needs.
867,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Performing Arts
6%
Outsourcing Company
5%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Performing Arts
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for N-able Remote Monitoring & Management?
The pricing is straightforward: it is based on a per-node basis. A node is a device that you would like to monitor to install the agent. The pricing is neither cheap nor expensive; it falls within ...
What is your primary use case for N-able Remote Monitoring & Management?
The typical use case for my clients is that there is no atypical case. I use N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management to have a warning about the state of endpoint and server and also to p...
What needs improvement with N-able Remote Monitoring & Management?
There is room for improvement in the functional aspects of N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management. For example, it should evaluate the penetration of assets and enhance asset management ...
 

Also Known As

SolarWinds N-central, SolarWinds MSP N-central
N-able Remote Monitoring & Management, SolarWinds MSP Remote Monitoring & Management, MSP RMM, SolarWinds RMM, SolarWinds Remote Monitoring and Management
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Premier Technology Solutions
NetSys Network Systems
Find out what your peers are saying about N-able N-central vs. N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
867,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.