Gardience vs Puppet: Pricing and Ratings Compared (2026)
Entry prices and free plans as read on each vendor's pricing page, and user ratings as published on review sites, for Gardience and Puppet side by side. This page compares data; it is not a hands-on review.
On the data: On the data below, Puppet leads on a free plan. We do not name an overall winner for this pair.
Short on time? Here's the quick answer
Based on published vendor pricing and features and on public review data, here's who should pick what:
Gardience
Manage Windows and Linux with supported Salt, Ansible, patching, and compliance
Best for you if:
- • Teams running Salt (or leaving Tanzu Salt or SUSE Multi-Linux Manager) that manage both Windows and Linux servers and want supported, flat-p
Puppet
Infrastructure automation and configuration management
Best for you if:
- • You want a free tier before you commit
| At a Glance | Gardience | Puppet |
|---|---|---|
Starts at | From $6,000/year Starter plan | Free plan |
Category | DevOps Infrastructure as Code | DevOps Infrastructure as Code |
Rating | n/a | 4.2/5 G2 4.2 761 reviews |
Free plan | No | Yes |
Choose Gardience or Puppet?
Choose Gardience if
- Teams running Salt (or leaving Tanzu Salt or SUSE Multi-Linux Manager) that manage both Windows and Linux servers and want supported, flat-p
- You want to manage Windows and Linux with supported Salt, Ansible, patching, and compliance
Choose Puppet if
- You want a free tier before you commit
In-Depth Analysis
Gardience
Manage Windows and Linux with supported Salt, Ansible, patching, and compliance
Strengths
- Pro: Windows and Linux managed from one console, at the same price per fleet
- Pro: Flat yearly price per fleet, not per machine, core or user
- Pro: Runs existing Ansible playbooks, including on Windows without WinRM
- Pro: Works with an existing Salt master, or installs its own with one command
- Pro: Every change goes through approvals and lands in a tamper-evident audit log
Weaknesses
- Con: Self-hosted only, SaaS in production: you run it on your own Linux server with Docker
- Con: Patching, CVE checks and compliance cover Windows and Linux, servers and desktops. macOS can run the Salt agent for commands and states, but Gardience does not patch or score it yet. Laptops off the n
- Con: A product, with fewer third-party integrations (ServiceNow, Slack approvals) than older suites
Key features
Puppet
Infrastructure automation and configuration management
Puppet's pricing is fair for small teams with its generous free tier for up to 25 nodes.
Strengths
- Pro: Mature configuration management
- Pro: Good for large scale
- Pro: Strong compliance
- Pro: Declarative model
- Pro: Enterprise features
Weaknesses
- Con: Learning curve (DSL)
- Con: Agent required
- Con: Less flexible than Ansible
- Con: Declining popularity
- Con: Complex for simple needs
Key features
Plans and prices: Gardience vs Puppet
| Tool | Plans and prices | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Gardience |
| gardience.com/pricing read Oct 23, 2026 |
| Puppet |
| puppet.com/pricing read Sep 28, 2026 |
Prices as read on each vendor's own pricing page on the date shown. Plans are listed per tool and are not matched against the other tool's plans: a plan name or price in one column says nothing about the same row in the other. Details on Gardience pricing and Puppet pricing.
Key Takeaways
Gardience
- Choose Gardience if you want to manage Windows and Linux with supported Salt, Ansible, patching, and compliance
Puppet
- Has a free plan
What the data shows
On the data below, Puppet leads on a free plan. We do not name an overall winner for this pair.
- Only Puppet has a published user rating (4.2/5 from 761 reviews); Gardience has none we can show.
- Gardience starts at $6,000/year; Puppet has no public paid plan price on file.
- Only Puppet has a free plan.
Criteria: user rating (only above 20 reviews on both sides, gap of 0.2 or more), entry price (only on the same billing basis), free plan. How we rate
Frequently Asked Questions
How do Gardience and Puppet compare in 2026?
On the data below, Puppet leads on a free plan. We do not name an overall winner for this pair. Only Puppet has a published user rating (4.2/5 from 761 reviews); Gardience has none we can show. Gardience starts at $6,000/year; Puppet has no public paid plan price on file. Only Puppet has a free plan.
What are Gardience and Puppet used for?
Gardience: Manage Windows and Linux with supported Salt, Ansible, patching, and compliance. Puppet: Infrastructure automation and configuration management.
What does Gardience cost vs Puppet?
Gardience's cheapest paid plan is Starter at $6,000/year. Puppet has no public paid-plan price on file. Prices read on the vendors' pricing pages, latest check Oct 23, 2026.
What's the main difference between Gardience and Puppet?
Gardience's main strength: windows and Linux managed from one console, at the same price per fleet. Puppet's main strength: mature configuration management.
Spotted an outdated price or a wrong fact? Suggest a correction: we check it against the vendor's own page. Work for one of these vendors? Claim your listing to update it yourself.