Would Ansible make sense for 500 to 600 Windows machines?

That’s a reasonable size to consider it. Ansible can handle Windows server work such as patch scheduling, software and agent installation, time settings, logging configuration, and routine host setup. It can also help with provisioning and reporting, especially when those tasks are otherwise handled by separate scripts.

I’d start with one repeatable job, like patching or installing an agent, then expand once the playbooks and access setup are working reliably.

First, what do you mean by clients? If these are Windows servers, Ansible can be a useful configuration and automation tool. If they’re end-user desktops, check whether its push-based management model fits how you need to reach and maintain those machines. A tool designed for desktop management may be a better fit for some endpoint tasks.

It’s flexible, but it isn’t magic. You’ll need to be comfortable reading playbooks and, for awkward Windows-specific jobs, using PowerShell or building a small custom module. That gives you a common way to run and report on tasks, but it also means troubleshooting can take work. Keep the first version small and understandable rather than trying to automate everything at once.

Think beyond changing settings on the machines. Ansible can also automate work against application, virtualization, storage, and network interfaces, so it may be useful even if another tool already handles some Windows configuration.

For a low-risk trial, pick a lab or a limited group and automate a task with a clear result, such as software deployment or patching. That’ll tell you more than judging it by the machine count alone.