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

Amazon MQ vs SQS comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon MQ
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
8th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Amazon SQS
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of Amazon MQ is 6.2%, down from 9.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Amazon SQS is 12.3%, down from 19.0% 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.
Aravind Nithiyanandham - PeerSpot reviewer
Used for notifying, queuing servers, and queuing messages
I created a support ticket one or two years ago. The technical support team responded promptly and helped us with the issues. I am very much happy with the solution’s technical support. They are knowledgeable, understand our problem easily, and then figure out the issues. On a scale from one to ten, where one is bad and ten is excellent, I rate the solution’s technical support nine and a half out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"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 a secure solution."
"Amazon MQ is managed by AWS and is easy to use."
"Amazon MQ is a very scalable solution."
"One of the most valuable features of Amazon SQS is its event-driven invocation."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon SQS is its scalability."
"It works consistently and is economical under a standard non-FIFO model."
"One of the useful features is the ability to schedule a call after a certain number of messages accumulate in the container. For example, if there are ten messages in the container, you can perform a specific action."
"SQS is very stable, and it has lots of features."
"I like how we can subscribe to multiple topics in Amazon SQS. It's also much simpler and quicker to set up than other solutions. It also supports patterns like Kafka and RapidMQ's fan-out pattern but with easier implementation."
"The most valuable features include the ability to handle a huge number of messages and the presence of a dead letter queue."
"All Amazon Web Services resources are easy to configure."
 

Cons

"The product should improve its monitoring capabilities. It needs to improve the pricing also."
"In community support, especially with distributed systems and integration, there is a need for better system organization."
"Amazon MQ isn't a cheap tool."
"The solution needs improvement in the back end and security."
"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."
"As a company that uses IBM solutions, it's difficult to compare Amazon SQS to other solutions. We have been using IBM solutions for a long time and they are very mature in integration and queuing. In my role as an integration manager, I can say that Amazon SQS is designed primarily for use within the Amazon ecosystem and does not have the same level of functionality as IBM MQ or other similar products. It has limited connectivity options and does not easily integrate with legacy systems."
"The tool needs improvement in user-friendliness and discoverability."
"It would be beneficial to have the ability to peek at messages currently in Amazon SQS without needing to monitor incoming messages."
"Sometimes, we have to switch to another component similar to SQS because the patching tool for SQS is relatively slow for us."
"Packages sometimes have delays in dropping, indicating reliability issues."
"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."
"Be cautious around pay-as-you-use licensing as costs can become expensive."
"There could be improvements in the UI for security and scalability."
 

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."
"It's quite expensive."
"I rate the tool's pricing a nine out of ten."
"The pricing model is pay-as-you-use. It depends on your usage and configuration."
"Compared to EC2 and other services, Amazon SQS' pricing is cheaper."
"Amazon SQS is more affordable compared to other solutions."
"Amazon SQS is moderately priced."
"Amazon SQS is quite expensive and is at the highest price point compared to other solutions."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
816,192 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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?
For end users, I want the tool to be made cheaper.
What is your primary use case for Amazon MQ?
My company is a software or solution provider. We design the solution to meet the requirements of our clients. Each client needs Amazon or Azure tools, so we go with the requirements of our client ...
What needs improvement with Amazon SQS?
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...
What is your primary use case for Amazon SQS?
The most common use case for Amazon SQS is decoupling an application. Instead of having one monolithic service with a timeout of about a minute, and if there are too many requests at the same time ...
 

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: October 2024.
816,192 professionals have used our research since 2012.