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."The initial Amazon MQ setup is very easy both when you do it on your own or use the self-managed instance."
"Amazon MQ is a very scalable solution."
"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."
"It is a useful way to maintain messages and to manage offset from our consumers."
"It is easy to configure."
"The most valuable features of the solution revolve around areas like the latency part, where the tool offers very little latency and the sequencing part."
"The publisher-subscriber pattern and low latency are also essential features that greatly piqued my interest."
"Robust and delivers messages quickly."
"It is a stable solution...A lot of my experience indicates that Apache Kafka is scalable."
"I like the performance and reliability of Kafka. I needed a data streaming buffer that could handle thousands of messages per second with at least one processing point for an analytics pipeline. Kafka fits this requirement very well."
"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."
"The product should improve its monitoring capabilities. It needs to improve the pricing also."
"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 solution's initial setup process was complex."
"Too much dependency on the zookeeper and leader selection is still the bottleneck for Kafka implementation."
"I suggest using cloud services because the solution is expensive if you are using it on-premises."
"It's not possible to substitute IBM MQ with Apache Kafka because the JMS part is not very stable."
"Apache Kafka can improve by providing a UI for monitoring. There are third-party tools that can do it, but it would be nice if it was already embedded within Apache Kafka."
"There are some latency problems with Kafka."
"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 price for the enterprise version is quite high. It would be better to have a lower price."
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 Oracle Data Integrator (ODI). 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.