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)
4th
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)
7th
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 February 2026, in the Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) category, the mindshare of N-able N-central is 7.7%, down from 12.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management is 5.0%, up from 4.6% 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-central7.7%
N-able N-sight Remote Monitoring & Management5.0%
Other87.3%
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Daniel Gombe - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Executive Officer at SOIT Business Solutions
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

"The most valuable features of N-central are its ease of deployment and ease of use."
"N-able N-central is very scalable."
"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 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 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."
"I like the remote connectivity, reporting suite, and patch management module."
"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."
"N-able N-central is an easy tool to implement with customers."
"Remote support has been very handy. It also lets us know if there are failing hard drives or Windows issues."
"I'm really happy with the background remote access, which allows me to easily change system internals such as registry keys and silently execute commands using the command prompt in the background. This kind of remote access makes it easy for us to do our jobs without getting in the customer's way."
"The reporting for this solution has been most valuable."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"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 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 most valuable aspect of N-able Remote Monitoring & Management is it provides an all-in solution for the different solutions."
 

Cons

"It was previously expensive and tedious to manage different licenses."
"At this moment, we encounter stability issues with N-able N-central from time to time."
"Involving AI in the platform could improve it further."
"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."
"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."
"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 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."
"The alerts and reporting could be done a little more clearly. They are quite cryptic, and quite often, we seem to get a lot of reports just for a computer rebooting or going offline for a couple of minutes, which doesn't seem like it's that big of a deal. Reporting could be refined and improved, and they can make it easy to decipher the reports."
"The product looks a bit old-fashioned."
"I would like to see notifications sent with SMS."
"The SentinelOne integration is not great."
"It would be great if the pricing model could be improved and the solution was more affordable."
"Additionally, N-sight has an anti-human device manager, but it is only for Apple iOS devices, not for Android."
"There is quite a bit of delay on the portal where we receive monitoring information from the endpoint agent on the remote device. Sometimes it gets stuck with no live response from the device, and you have to refresh the portal just to make sure that it's projecting the right information."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"N-able N-central is not an expensive solution."
"The pricing and licensing are average, almost six out of ten."
"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."
"The product is fairly priced."
"The solution is not very expensive."
"It's expensive and out of our budget."
"Out clients pay monthly for the license of N-able Remote Monitoring & Management."
"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."
"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."
"There is a license required for this solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) solutions are best for your needs.
881,928 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
14%
Computer Software Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Performing Arts
7%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Performing Arts
13%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Transportation Company
5%
 

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 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...
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: December 2025.
881,928 professionals have used our research since 2012.