We performed a comparison between Amazon SQS and IBM MQ 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."SQS is very stable, and it has lots of features."
"I am able to find out what's going on very easily."
"The libraries that connect and manage the queues are rich in features."
"It is stable and scalable."
"There is no setup just some easy configuration required."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon SQS is the interface."
"The solution is easy to scale and cost-effective."
"With SQS, we can trigger events in various cloud environments. It offers numerous benefits for us."
"Overall the solution operates well and has good integration."
"The product helps us monitor messages with other queues, view duplicated messages and control undelivered messages."
"Setting up MQ is easy. We had a "grow as you go" implementation strategy. We started with a single channel and progressed to multiple queues and channels depending on the systems and integrations with other systems. It was a gradual deployment and expansion as we grew the services interacting with the core system using MQ."
"The clusterization which results in persistence is the most valuable feature."
"Reliability is the most valuable feature. MQ is used to support critical business applications."
"The most valuable feature is that it's a very strong integration platform but it is quite a monolithic solution. It's got everything."
"The solution is stable."
"I appreciate the level of control we have over queue managers, queues, and the messaging itself. That provides good security. So, the control and scalability of messaging are important to me."
"Support could be improved."
"The current visibility timeout of five minutes is okay. However, I'd like to explore the possibility of extending it for specific use cases."
"The initial setup of Amazon SQS is in the middle range of difficulty. You need to learn Amazon AWS and know how to navigate, create resources, and structures, and provide rules."
"Be cautious around pay-as-you-use licensing as costs can become expensive."
"There are some issues with SQS's transaction queue regarding knowing if something has been received."
"Sending or receiving messages takes some time, and it could be quicker."
"It would be easier to have a dashboard that allows us to see everything and manage everything since we have so many queues."
"Sometimes, we have to switch to another component similar to SQS because the patching tool for SQS is relatively slow for us."
"I would like to see message duplication included."
"The product does not allow users to access data from API or external networks since it can only be used in a closed network, making it an area where improvements are required."
"Presenting and maybe having some different options for different user experiences based on the administrative duties that you have to do as an app manager or configure the server or security would be an improvement."
"In terms of volume, it is not able to handle a huge volume. We also have limitations of queues related to IBM MQ. We often need to handle a very big volume, but currently we do have limitations. If those kinds of limitations could be relaxed, it would help us to work better."
"The user interface should be enhanced to include more monitoring features and other metrics. The metrics should include not only those from the IBM MQ point of view but also CPU and memory utilization."
"There are many complications with IBM MQ servers."
"I would like to see it integrate with the newer ways of messaging, such as Kafka. They might say that you have IBM Integration Bus to do that stuff, but it would be great if MQ could, out-of-the-box, listen to public Kafka."
"I believe there is too much code to be done in order to handle the elements that you develop."
Amazon SQS is ranked 5th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 13 reviews while IBM MQ is ranked 2nd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 158 reviews. Amazon SQS is rated 8.2, while IBM MQ is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Amazon SQS writes "Stable, useful interface, and scales well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM MQ writes "Offers the ability to batch metadata transfers between systems that support MQ as the communication method". Amazon SQS is most compared with Apache Kafka, Redis, Amazon MQ, Anypoint MQ and PubSub+ Event Broker, whereas IBM MQ is most compared with ActiveMQ, Apache Kafka, VMware Tanzu Data Services, Red Hat AMQ and Anypoint MQ. See our Amazon SQS vs. IBM MQ 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.
