We performed a comparison between Confluent and Databricks based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Streaming Analytics solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance."
"I would rate the scalability of the solution at eight out of ten. We have 20 people who use Confluent in our organization now, and we hope to increase usage in the future."
"Confluence's greatest asset is its user-friendly interface, coupled with its remarkable ability to seamlessly integrate with a vast range of other solutions."
"One of the best features of Confluent is that it's very easy to search and have a live status with Jira."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"It is also good for knowledge base management."
"The benefit is escaping email communication. Sometimes people ignore emails or put them into spam, but with Confluence, everyone sees the same text at the same time."
"We mostly use the solution's message queues and event-driven architecture."
"When we have a huge volume of data that we want to process with speed, velocity, and volume, we go through Databricks."
"The most valuable feature of Databricks is the integration with Microsoft Azure."
"The most valuable feature of Databricks is the notebook, data factory, and ease of use."
"Ability to work collaboratively without having to worry about the infrastructure."
"A very valuable feature is the data processing, and the solution is specifically good at using the Spark ecosystem."
"The processing capacity is tremendous in the database."
"The solution is an impressive tool for data migration and integration."
"Databricks gives us the ability to build a lakehouse framework and do everything implicit to this type of database structure. We also like the ability to stream events. Databricks covers a broad spectrum, from reporting and machine learning to streaming events. It's important for us to have all these features in one platform."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
"It could be more user-friendly and centralized. A way to reduce redundancy would be helpful."
"It could be improved by including a feature that automatically creates a new topic and puts failed messages."
"The formatting aspect within the page can be improved and more powerful."
"There is no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"Currently, in the early stages, I see a gap on the security side. If you are using the SaaS version, we would like to get a fuller, more secure solution that can be adopted right out of the box. Confluence could do a better job sharing best practices or a reusable pattern that others have used, especially for companies that can not afford to hire professional services from Confluent."
"There is a limitation when it comes to seamlessly importing Microsoft documents into Confluent pages, which can be inconvenient for users who frequently work with Microsoft Office tools and need to transition their content to Confluent."
"The solution could be improved by integrating it with data packets. Right now, the load tables provide a function, like team collaboration. Still, it's unclear as to if there's a function to create different branches and/or more branches. Our team had used data packets before, however, I feel it's difficult to integrate the current with the previous data packets."
"Databricks has added some alerts and query functionality into their SQL persona, but the whole SQL persona, which is like a role, needs a lot of development. The alerts are not very flexible, and the query interface itself is not as polished as the notebook interface that is used through the data science and machine learning persona. It is clunky at present."
"I would like to see the integration between Databricks and MLflow improved. It is quite hard to train multiple models in parallel in the distributed fashions. You hit rate limits on the clients very fast."
"Instead of relying on a massive instance, the solution should offer micro partition levels. They're working on it, however, they need to implement it to help the solution run more effectively."
"The solution could improve by providing better automation capabilities. For example, working together with more of a DevOps approach, such as continuous integration."
"The product should provide more advanced features in future releases."
"There is room for improvement in visualization."
"Databricks' performance when serving the data to an analytics tool isn't as good as Snowflake's."
Confluent is ranked 4th in Streaming Analytics with 21 reviews while Databricks is ranked 2nd in Streaming Analytics with 78 reviews. Confluent is rated 8.4, while Databricks is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Confluent writes "Has good technical support services and a valuable feature for real-time data streaming ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Databricks writes "A nice interface with good features for turning off clusters to save on computing". Confluent is most compared with Amazon MSK, Amazon Kinesis, AWS Glue, Oracle GoldenGate and Fivetran, whereas Databricks is most compared with Amazon SageMaker, Informatica PowerCenter, Dataiku and Dremio. See our Confluent vs. Databricks report.
See our list of best Streaming Analytics vendors.
We monitor all Streaming Analytics 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.