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

Amazon SQS vs IBM MQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon SQS
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM MQ
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
163
Ranking in other categories
Business Activity Monitoring (1st), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of Amazon SQS is 11.9%, down from 18.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM MQ is 29.5%, up from 26.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

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.
SelvaKumar4 - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers the ability to batch metadata transfers between systems that support MQ as the communication method
We find it scalable for internal applications, but not so much for external integrations. 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. IBM MQ needs to improve the UI for quicker logging. Users should also have a lot more control over logging, with a dashboard-like interface. That's something they should definitely work on.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"SQS is very stable, and it has lots of features."
"We use the tool in interface integrations."
"It's very quick and easy to build or set up Amazon SQS."
"We use SNS as the publisher, and our procurement service subscribes to those events using SQS. In the past, we relied on time-based or batch-based processes to send data between services on-premises. With SQS, we can trigger actions based on real-time changes in business processes, improving reliability."
"Amazon SQS provides faster search through indexing via OpenSearch."
"Amazon SQS is reliable, with no issues to date."
"The most valuable features include the ability to handle a huge number of messages and the presence of a dead letter queue."
"With SQS, we can trigger events in various cloud environments. It offers numerous benefits for us."
"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."
"I have found the solution to be very robust. It has a strong reputation, easy to use, simple to configure in our enterprise software, and supports all the protocols that we use."
"There is no dependency on the end party service's run status."
"The most valuable feature of IBM MQ is transaction processing."
"The solution is very easy to work with."
"Secure, safe, and very fast."
"We use our routing feature when the request is coming from the business application. The request goes to the distributive side and it is routed to the right claim instance."
"Assists with our apps and has great message processing."
 

Cons

"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."
"The solution is not available on-premises so that rules out any customers looking for the messaging solution on-premises."
"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."
"Improvement is needed in terms of troubleshooting and logs."
"There are some issues with SQS's transaction queue regarding knowing if something has been received."
"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."
"Be cautious around pay-as-you-use licensing as costs can become expensive."
"Sometimes, we have to switch to another component similar to SQS because the patching tool for SQS is relatively slow for us."
"Should have more integration in the monitoring tools."
"I would like the ability to connect with some of the more recent offerings, such as API Connect; being able to publish our MQ endpoints, the queues, the messaging infrastructure as IT assets."
"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."
"Sometimes, not all messages are consumed in the queues. File transfers need improvement."
"If they could come up with monitoring dashboards that would be good. We are using external monitoring tools, apart from our IBM MQ, to monitor IBM MQ. If we could get monitoring tools or dashboards to keep everything simple for the user to understand, that would be good."
"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."
"What could be improved is the high-availability. The way MQ works is that it separates the high-availability from the workload balance. The scalability should be easier. If something happens so that the messages are not available on each node, scalability is only possible for the workload balance."
"Everything in the solution could be simplified a little. We have trouble with the configuration and cost which is mostly an internal issue, but nevertheless, the errors do come up when there are configuration changes across a specific version. We have slightly different versions, which may have slightly different configurations which cause issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Amazon SQS is moderately priced."
"Amazon SQS is quite expensive and is at the highest price point compared to other solutions."
"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."
"Compared to the other options and based on what I have heard, Amazon SQS is relatively more expensive, but it is not insanely expensive."
"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."
"It's quite expensive."
"If one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the tool's price a seven. The product is expensive."
"IBM MQ is expensive and they charge based on the CPU."
"The licensing fees are paid quarterly and they are expensive."
"IBM products, in general, have high licensing costs and support costs are too high."
"The problem with this product is that it's a little bit expensive."
"IBM MQ appliance has pricing options, but they are costly."
"Most of our customers are quite happy with the solution but they have an issue with the cost. They want to move to cheaper solutions."
"I rate the product price a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
38%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Government
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon SQS?
A primary area of improvement for Amazon SQS is the message size limitation, which is currently restricted to 256 kilobytes per message. If this could be increased, it would benefit many use cases....
What is your primary use case for Amazon SQS?
I have been heavily using Amazon SQS for the last more than four years in serverless and decoupled solutions. We use it in workflows like order creation, where the order creation task is queued, al...
What is MQ software?
Hi As someone with 45+ years of experience in the Transaction and Message Processing world, I have seen many "MQ" solutions that have come into the market place. From my perspective, while each pro...
What are the differences between Apache Kafka and IBM MQ?
Apache Kafka is open source and can be used for free. It has very good log management and has a way to store the data used for analytics. Apache Kafka is very good if you have a high number of user...
How does IBM MQ compare with VMware RabbitMQ?
IBM MQ has a great reputation behind it, and this solution is very robust with great stability. It is easy to use, simple to configure and integrates well with our enterprise ecosystem and protocol...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
WebSphere MQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

EMS, NASA, BMW, Capital One
Deutsche Bahn, Bon-Ton, WestJet, ARBURG, Northern Territory Government, Tata Steel Europe, Sharp Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon SQS vs. IBM MQ and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.