Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon MQ vs SQS comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon MQ
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Amazon SQS
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of Amazon MQ is 3.2%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Amazon SQS is 8.8%, down from 11.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

David Onuh - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides you with a URL where you can either send or retrieve messages
For messaging, we use SQL queues, not MQ queues. When a request comes into our front-end application, we put this message into a queue. The right service picks up a particular message from the queue, performs the operation, and calls the next service. The next service taking that message can either perform services on the message or attach it to a new queue from multiple services. It's as if we have multiple services working hand-in-hand, but we use a queue system to either get or send messages. I only use Amazon MQ for one specific thing. I wouldn't say I've used it extensively to know what is more beneficial. We use the solution to pick out matrices from a particular queue, process the queue, and process the messages they push into something else. It was really fast. One of the good things I love about the solution is that you hardly get two services working on one message. When a subscriber to a queue consumes their message, it's in the queue at a particular moment. All the messages are only visible to the particular subscriber. Suppose ten services are trying to get a message from the queue. Out of the ten, if five pick the same messages, you will get duplicate transactions and weird errors. It does a very good job abstracting that for you, so you don't have to write the logic. Amazon MQ has done all that it was supposed to do. Most of the issues boil down to a skill or a pricing issue. Overall, I rate Amazon MQ ten out of ten.
Ariel Tarayants - PeerSpot reviewer
Powerful queue system facilitates seamless asynchronous operations
A feature I would like to see in Amazon SQS is the ability to view the content of messages without removing them from the queue. Enhanced filtering on the messages would be beneficial, as currently one has to pull all messages out, filter the right one by code, and then re-insert the remaining messages. This solution is not effective with the FIFO queue.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Amazon MQ is a secure 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."
"We have found Amazon MQ to provide scalability, robustness, and security."
"Amazon MQ is a very scalable solution."
"Amazon MQ is important for being collaborative, allowing for centralized information."
"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 managed by AWS and is easy to use."
"One of the most valuable features of Amazon SQS is its event-driven invocation."
"SQS is very stable, and it has lots of features."
"The scale it manages is quite impressive."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The most valuable features include the ability to handle a huge number of messages and the presence of a dead letter queue."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to decouple components."
"Amazon SQS is reliable, with no issues to date."
"I am able to find out what's going on very easily."
 

Cons

"In community support, especially with distributed systems and integration, there is a need for better system organization."
"The solution needs improvement in the back end and security."
"Amazon MQ isn't a cheap tool."
"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."
"Depending on your use cases, Amazon MQ can be cheap or expensive."
"The product should improve its monitoring capabilities. It needs to improve the pricing also."
"If Amazon provided a templating engine, it would be great."
"Amazon SQS is costly. I think there could be improvements in how it facilitates comparisons between different AWS products. A calculator would be helpful. The calculator for Kafka is based on factors like throughput or storage used in the last month. In contrast, the calculator for Amazon SQS is based on the number of transactions processed. These different approaches make it challenging to compare them directly. I suggest AWS provide a straightforward calculator where I can input one aspect, and it calculates costs for multiple solutions."
"I cannot send a message to multiple people simultaneously. It can only be sent to one recipient."
"It would be easier to have a dashboard that allows us to see everything and manage everything since we have so many queues."
"The cost became an issue, leading us to consider other solutions."
"The solution is not available on-premises so that rules out any customers looking for the messaging solution on-premises."
"Support could be improved."
"There are some issues with SQS's transaction queue regarding knowing if something has been received."
"Sometimes, we have to switch to another component similar to SQS because the patching tool for SQS is relatively slow for us."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As a client or as an end user, I would say that Google Cloud Storage or Google Cloud are cheaper than Amazon MQ."
"Depending on your use cases, Amazon MQ can be cheap or expensive."
"The pricing of Amazon SQS is reasonable. The first million requests are free every month, and after, it's cost 40 cents for every million requests. There are not any additional fees."
"The pricing model is pay-as-you-use. It depends on your usage and configuration."
"I rate the tool's pricing a nine out of ten."
"Amazon SQS is moderately priced."
"Amazon SQS offers a generous free tier, beyond which it remains very cost-effective. The cost per million messages is less than a dollar, making it an economical choice."
"It's quite expensive."
"Compared to the other options and based on what I have heard, Amazon SQS is relatively more expensive, but it is not insanely expensive."
"Amazon SQS is more affordable compared to other solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
839,319 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Amazon MQ?
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.
What needs improvement with Amazon MQ?
The message queue requires an improvement in the message template MQ link. If Amazon provided a templating engine, it would be great.
What is your primary use case for Amazon MQ?
We are using Amazon MQ for our AI model. It's used for notifications and other services. We have an application for which Amazon MQ acts as a broker.
What needs improvement with Amazon SQS?
AWS provides another messaging service, which is fine for certain purposes. SQS meets the cloud messaging workload requirements. However, combining the features of both products could be an easier ...
What is your primary use case for Amazon SQS?
I primarily use SQL Server for messaging services, and I need to offer loose couplings. SQS is handy for offloading non-urgent tasks that can be reverted later. I use it as a queue management servi...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SkipTheDishes, Malmberg, Dealer.com, Bench Accounting
EMS, NASA, BMW, Capital One
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon MQ vs. Amazon SQS and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
839,319 professionals have used our research since 2012.