| Feature | Devin | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Free Plan | ✗ No | ✓ Yes |
| Pricing | $500/mo | Free / $9–$29/mo |
| Rating | ★★★★☆ 4.4 | ★★★★★ 4.6 |
| Key Feature 1 | End-to-end task autonomy | Visual workflow builder |
| Key Feature 2 | Sandboxed Linux environment | 1,500+ app connectors |
| Key Feature 3 | Long-horizon memory | Error handling |
Reach buyers comparing Devin and Make. High-intent traffic, direct conversions.
Devin and Make are rated almost identically by users (4.4 vs 4.6), so the right pick comes down to feature fit rather than overall quality. Make offers a free plan, making it the lower-risk option to try first — Devin starts at $500/mo. Devin tends to be favoured by enterprises, while Make is more popular with agencies and freelancers.
Devin versus Make is one of the more common decisions buyers face — Devin is built around coding tools while Make leans toward productivity tools. Devin is best known for end-to-end task autonomy, whereas Make stands out for visual workflow builder. On aggregate user ratings Make holds a slight edge (4.4/5 vs 4.6/5), though that gap rarely decides the match on its own.
Where Devin pulls clearly ahead is implementing a complete feature from a GitHub issue or specification. A frequent plus in reviews: Most autonomous coding agent available. Make, by contrast, is the stronger choice for building complex multi-branch automation with conditional logic. In its favour: More powerful than Zapier — especially for visual workflow builder workflows where Make consistently outperforms manual approaches. Trying to force either tool outside its lane is where teams usually get frustrated.
Devin is genuinely impressive for well-scoped engineering tasks — the level of autonomous action is beyond what IDE plugins can achieve. Make is the right automation tool for anyone who has hit Zapier's complexity ceiling. If you only have budget or appetite for one, match the tool to your heaviest workflow rather than the spec sheet.
Choose Devin if you are focused on engineering teams wanting to offload well-defined, self-contained software tasks to an autonomous agent — particularly for implementing features from specifications, debugging issues, and modernising legacy code, or if a big part of your week goes to debugging a complex production issue autonomously by tracing through code. It rewards teams ready to commit to a paid plan from the start.
Choose Make if your priority is technical users, developers, and operations teams who need complex automation with branching logic, data transformation, and multi-step processes — and who find Zapier too simple, especially for transforming and mapping data between apps with custom formulas. A free plan is available, so you can trial the workflow at zero cost first.
Real-world output tracks the ratings closely: Devin at 4.4/5 and Make at 4.6/5, with the difference showing up most in implementing a complete feature from a GitHub issue or specification.
Learning curve is worth weighing. Devin has a known trade-off — Very expensive at $500/month — worth evaluating before committing if this is central to your use case. On Make's side: Steeper learning curve — worth evaluating before committing if this is central to your use case. Factor in the integrations you already rely on — that usually settles which one sticks after the trial.
Make is the easier on-ramp: it offers a free plan, whereas Devin asks for payment up front. Paid plans start at $500/mo for Devin (Team) and $9/mo for Make (Core), making Make the cheaper entry point at $9/mo versus $500/mo. The extra spend on Devin only pays off if you need what its higher tier unlocks. The sticker price rarely tells the whole story — check seat counts and usage limits before you commit.
🚀 Ready to decide? Try both free and see which fits your workflow.
Devin is Cognition AI's fully autonomous software engineer — it can plan, write, debug, test, and deploy code end-to-end from a natural lang… Read the full Devin review →
Make (formerly Integromat) is a visual automation platform connecting 1,800+ apps through a drag-and-drop scenario builder. Unlike Zapier's … Read the full Make review →
• Most autonomous coding agent available
• Handles end-to-end task completion — especially for end-to-end task autonomy workflows where Devin consistently outperforms manual approaches
• Real-time visibility into agent actions
• Integrates natively with GitHub — especially for end-to-end task autonomy workflows where Devin consistently outperforms manual approaches
• Very expensive at $500/month — worth evaluating before committing if this is central to your use case
• Struggles with ambiguous requirements — a real limitation for power users who need those capabilities
• More powerful than Zapier — especially for visual workflow builder workflows where Make consistently outperforms manual approaches
• Practical free tier that lets you validate the tool before committing to paid plans
• Highly customizable and flexible, allowing users to create complex automations tailored to their specific needs
• Cost-effective for high-volume automations, with a pricing model based on operations rather than tasks
• Steeper learning curve — worth evaluating before committing if this is central to your use case
• UI can be complex — worth evaluating before committing if this is central to your use case