n8n, Make, and Zapier all do the same core thing: they connect apps so a trigger in one app (a form is submitted) causes an action in another (add a row, send a message). The differences are about price, control, and how much you want to host yourself — not about what is possible. For most small automations, all three get the job done; the choice is about fit, not power.
Zapier is the easiest to start with. It has the most app integrations and the friendliest setup, so if you want something working this afternoon with no technical fuss, it's the safe pick. The trade-off is cost: its pricing climbs quickly as your number of automated steps grows, so a heavy workflow can get expensive.
Make (formerly Integromat) sits in the middle. It's more visual and gives you finer control over each step — loops, filters, data shaping — usually at a lower cost per operation than Zapier. The learning curve is a bit steeper, but you get more for your money once you're past it.
n8n is the one for control and cost at scale. It's open-source and can be self-hosted, which means once it runs on your own server the per-run cost effectively disappears — you pay for the server, not per task. That's powerful for high-volume work, but it asks more of you up front: you (or someone) maintains the hosting, updates, and reliability.
A simple way to decide: if you want it working today and volume is low, start with Zapier. If you're cost-conscious and comfortable with a little setup, Make. If you're running a lot of automations and want to own the cost and the data, n8n on your own server. You can also start on a hosted tool and move to n8n later once the volume justifies it.
Whichever you pick, the rule is the same: automate one clear task first, watch it for a few days, and keep a way to see when something fails. The tool matters less than building automations you can trust and check.