Zapier vs Make vs n8n: cost of 1,000 Sume clip jobs

The comparison

For 1,000 Sume clip jobs, the three tools meter different things: Zapier counts tasks, Make counts module credits and n8n counts executions. With the same design on each (submit a job, then receive a webhook and store the URL), I count 2,000 Zapier tasks, 4,000 Make credits and 1,010 n8n executions when you batch submits by 100. These counts are my design assumptions, not vendor figures.

How I counted

Zapier's page says triggers, polling and built-ins like Formatter, Paths and Filter do not use tasks, so only the submit and the store step count: 2 per job, 2,000 for 1,000. Make's page says each module action is 1 credit; I counted four modules per job (webhook, create, fetch result, write): 4,000 credits, which is 40% of the 10k on Core. n8n charges per workflow run: 1,000 jobs in batches of 100 is 10 runs (1,000 divided by 100), plus 1,000 receiving runs, 1,010 in all, 40.4% of Starter's 2.5K.

None of that includes the render itself, which Sume bills per job at the rate card, for example $0.184 per second for a standard avatar clip with no product.

Which to pick

All three must respect Sume's side: on Pro, 4 jobs process at once and up to 20 queue, so pace submits. See generation admission.

• Pick n8n when you can batch: bulk requests collapse hundreds of rows into one run.
• Pick Make when the scenario is visual and credits fit under 10k a month.
• Pick Zapier when the rest of the stack is already there and the task count stays low; check the 2.5x or 1.25x overage first.