We performed a comparison between Amazon MQ and Apache Kafka based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Amazon MQ is a very scalable solution."
"The initial Amazon MQ setup is very easy both when you do it on your own or use the self-managed instance."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its managed service aspect. It's simple to implement and use. It requires minimal effort to maintain business operations."
"The use of Kafka's logging mechanism has been extremely beneficial for us, as it allows us to sequence messages, track pointers, and manage memory without having to create multiple copies."
"It is the performance that is really meaningful."
"The publisher-subscriber pattern and low latency are also essential features that greatly piqued my interest."
"The most valuable feature is that it can handle high volume."
"Kafka, as compared with other messaging system options, is great for large scale message processing applications. It offers high throughput with built-in fault-tolerance and replication."
"All the features of Apache Kafka are valuable, I cannot single out one feature."
"Excellent speeds for publishing messages faster."
"Its availability is brilliant."
"Depending on your use cases, Amazon MQ can be cheap or expensive."
"Amazon MQ is a good solution for small and medium-sized enterprises. It's open-source software, which means it's cheaper than its competitors."
"The product should improve its monitoring capabilities. It needs to improve the pricing also."
"Kafka's interface could also use some work. Some of our products are in C, and we don't have any libraries to use with C. From an interface perspective, we had a library from the readies. And we are streaming some of the products we built to readies. That is one of the requirements. It would be good to have those libraries available in a future release for our C++ clients or public libraries, so we can include them in our product and build on that."
"Kafka is a nightmare to administer."
"One of the things I am mostly looking for is that once the message is picked up from Kafka, it should not be visible or able to be consumed by other applications, or something along those lines. That feature is not present, but it is not a limitation or anything of the sort; rather, it is a desirable feature. The next release should include a feature that prevents messages from being consumed by other applications once they are picked up by Kafka."
"The initial setup and deployment could be less complex."
"The solution can improve its cloud support."
"The price for the enterprise version is quite high. It would be better to have a lower price."
"The model where you create the integration or the integration scenario needs improvement."
"Some vendors don't offer extra features for monitoring."
Amazon MQ is ranked 9th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 3 reviews while Apache Kafka is ranked 1st in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 78 reviews. Amazon MQ is rated 8.4, while Apache Kafka is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Amazon MQ writes "Provides you with a URL where you can either send or retrieve messages". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Apache Kafka writes "Real-time processing and reliable for data integrity". Amazon MQ is most compared with Amazon SQS, VMware Tanzu Data Services, IBM MQ, Red Hat AMQ and EMQX, whereas Apache Kafka is most compared with IBM MQ, Amazon SQS, Red Hat AMQ, Anypoint MQ and IBM Event Streams. See our Amazon MQ vs. Apache Kafka report.
See our list of best Message Queue (MQ) Software vendors.
We monitor all Message Queue (MQ) Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.