Pipedrive vs Salesforce
These sit at opposite ends of the CRM market. Pipedrive is a pipeline tool with published per-seat prices that a team can be using the same afternoon. Salesforce is a configurable platform, quoted per seat, that needs an administrator and a partner. Small and mid-sized teams selling by conversation pick Pipedrive; enterprises with complex territories pick Salesforce.
Vendors can pay for visibility on this site; it never changes what we say about a product. How that works.
Choose Pipedrive ifyou have between two and twenty salespeople, want them updating deals this week, and would rather see the price on a web page than in a quote.
Choose Salesforce ifyour sales operation spans hundreds of sellers and complex territories, and you have the staff and budget to configure a platform around your own process.
Pipedrive and Salesforce side by side
| Pipedrive | Salesforce | |
|---|---|---|
| Our CRM rank | #1 of 14 | #12 of 14 |
| Established in | Estonia | United States |
| Pricing | Per seat per month, published; 14-day trial, add-ons extra | Per seat per month, quoted |
| Free tier | — | — |
| Open source | — | — |
| Self-hostable | — | — |
| Built for | A sales team that will actually update the pipeline daily | A large sales organisation with the budget and staff to configure it |
| Not for | A company that needs marketing automation in the same system | A ten-person company that just needs deals in one place |
Both are reviewed in full in our CRM ranking: Pipedrive and Salesforce.
Where they differ
Pipedrive 3 · Salesforce 1 · open 0- 01
Time until the team is using it
Pipedrive's setup is an afternoon. With Salesforce nothing is quick: the platform has to be configured into a product, typically with an implementation partner for the first build. If the aim is to have salespeople logging deals by the end of the week, only Pipedrive makes that realistic.
Edge: Pipedrive
- 02
How far it stretches
Salesforce can model anything a sales process needs and is highly extensible, which is the whole case for it in large organisations. Pipedrive is deliberately lighter: reporting turns shallow once revenue attribution is wanted, and marketing and service are add-ons. When the process is complicated, Salesforce has room that Pipedrive does not try to offer.
Edge: Salesforce
- 03
Knowing the price in advance
Pipedrive publishes its per-seat prices, although campaign and web tracking add-ons raise the total quickly. Salesforce is quoted, and its bill grows through add-ons that were not priced when the contract was signed. A buyer who needs a firm number before talking to sales will get one from Pipedrive.
Edge: Pipedrive
- 04
Who has to look after it
A Pipedrive account can be run by the sales team itself. Salesforce needs an administrator as a standing role, which is sensible for a large sales organisation and heavy for a company of twelve. The winner here is the product that asks for fewer people, though an enterprise may see that overhead as acceptable.
Edge: Pipedrive
When neither fits
A company too broad for a pure pipeline tool yet too small to staff a platform falls between the two. HubSpot gives sales and marketing one system starting from a free plan, and Zoho CRM offers forecasting and territory management at a low published price.
Pipedrive or Salesforce: questions
3 answersIs Pipedrive enough, or do we need Salesforce?
Pipedrive is enough for a team of two to twenty that sells by conversation and mainly needs an accurate pipeline. Salesforce becomes the better answer when there are hundreds of sellers, complex territories and staff available to configure and administer it.
Why does Pipedrive rank above Salesforce on this site?
Because adoption decides whether a CRM works. Pipedrive is arranged around the one action a salesperson performs between calls, moving a deal a stage, so it gets updated. Salesforce can do far more, but only after someone has been paid to configure it.
Is Salesforce more expensive than Pipedrive?
Our data holds no price figures for a direct comparison: Pipedrive's prices are published and Salesforce's are quoted. What it does show is that Salesforce adds an administrator, an implementation partner and add-ons to the licence, and is described as expensive for a small team.