We performed a comparison between IBM MQ and Red Hat AMQ 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."It offers better reliability and monitoring compared to other tools."
"Has helped integrate between applications, reduce rework, and costs by reusing working components of existing applications."
"The clusterization which results in persistence is the most valuable feature."
"IBM HQ's stability is great - we send six million messages a day, and we're very satisfied with HQ's ability to handle that volume."
"The reliability of the queuing is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is the stability. It's perfect in this way."
"The most valuable feature is that it's a very strong integration platform but it is quite a monolithic solution. It's got everything."
"I like the architecture it provides seamlessly for assured delivery."
"The most valuable feature for us is the operator-based automation that is provided by Streams for infrastructure as well as user and topic management. This saves a lot of time and effort on our part to provide infrastructure. For example, the deployment of infrastructure is reduced from approximately a week to a day."
"The solution is very lightweight, easy to configure, simple to manage, and robust since it launched."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"Red Hat AMQ's best feature is its reliability."
"AMQ is highly scalable and performs well. It can process a large volume of messages in one second. AMQ and OpenShift are a good combination."
"This product is well adopted on the OpenShift platform. For organizations like ours that use OpenShift for many of our products, this is a good feature."
"My impression is that it is average in terms of scalability."
"Reliability is the main criterion for selecting this tool for one of the busiest airports in Mumbai."
"It needs a User Interface which is better than the aging MQ Explorer. The existing solution MQ Explorer is outdated."
"At a recent conference, I went to a presentation that had the latest version and it has amazing stuff that's coming out. So, I am excited to use those, specifically surrounding the web console and the fact that it's API integrated."
"It should support a wider range of protocols, not just a few specific ones. Many other products have broader protocol support, and IBM MQ is lagging in that area."
"We have had scalability issues with some projects in the past."
"The monitoring could be improved. It's a pain to monitor the throughput through the MQ. The maximum throughput for a queue or single channel isn't clear. We could also use some professional services by IBM to assess and tune the performance."
"IBM MQ is not very user-friendly."
"We would like to see the IBM technical support team extend their hand to providing support for other cloud vendors like Azure, Google Cloud, and AWS"
"I believe there is too much code to be done in order to handle the elements that you develop."
"There is improvement needed to keep the support libraries updated."
"Red Hat AMQ's cost could be improved, and it could have better integration."
"The challenge is the multiple components it has. This brings a higher complexity compared to IBM MQ, which is a single complete unit."
"This product needs better visualization capabilities in general."
"There are several areas in this solution that need improvement, including clustering multi-nodes and message ordering."
"The turnaround of adopting new versions of underlying technologies sometimes is too slow."
"There are some aspects of the monitoring that could be improved on. There is a tool that is somewhat connected to Kafka called Service Registry. This is a product by Red Hat that I would like to see integrated more tightly."
"AMQ could be better integrated with Jira and patch management tools."
IBM MQ is ranked 2nd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 158 reviews while Red Hat AMQ is ranked 8th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 8 reviews. IBM MQ is rated 8.4, while Red Hat AMQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM MQ writes "Offers the ability to batch metadata transfers between systems that support MQ as the communication method". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat AMQ writes "A stable, open-source technology, with a convenient deployment". IBM MQ is most compared with ActiveMQ, Apache Kafka, VMware Tanzu Data Services, PubSub+ Event Broker and Anypoint MQ, whereas Red Hat AMQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, ActiveMQ, VMware Tanzu Data Services, IBM Event Streams and Amazon MQ. See our IBM MQ vs. Red Hat AMQ 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.
