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

Cloudera Data Science Workbench vs Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 5, 2024

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

Cloudera Data Science Workb...
Ranking in Data Science Platforms
22nd
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Azure Machine Lea...
Ranking in Data Science Platforms
5th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
AI Development Platforms (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Data Science Platforms category, the mindshare of Cloudera Data Science Workbench is 1.3%, down from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio is 5.3%, down from 9.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Science Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

Ismail Peer - PeerSpot reviewer
Useful for data science modeling but improvement is needed in MLOps and pricing
If you don't configure CDSW well, then it might be not useful for you. Deploying the tool can vary in complexity, but most of the time, it's relatively simple and straightforward. Triggering a job from data to production is easy, as the platform automates the deployment process. However, ensuring optimal resource allocation is essential for smooth operations.
Takayuki Umehara - PeerSpot reviewer
Streamlined workflows with drag and drop convenience but needs enhancements in AI
I use Machine Learning Studio for system reselling and integration Machine Learning Studio is easy to use, with a significant feature being the drag and drop interface that enhances workflow without any complaints. It provides a return on investment and cost savings, proving beneficial for…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The Cloudera Data Science Workbench is customizable and easy to use."
"I appreciate CDSW's ability to logically segregate environments, such as data, DR, and production, ensuring they don't interfere with each other. The deployment of machine learning is fast and easy to manage. Its API calls are also fast."
"The notebook feature allows you to write inquiries and create dashboards. These dashboards can integrate with multiple databases, such as Excel, HANA, or SQL Server."
"I like that it's totally easy to use. They have an AutoML solution, and their machine learning model is highly accurate. They also have a feature that can explain the machine learning model. This makes it easy for me to understand that model."
"The most valuable feature is its compatibility with Tensorflow."
"It is very easy to test different kinds of machine-learning algorithms with different parameters. You choose the algorithm, drag and drop to the workspace, and plug the dataset into this component."
"The solution is very fast and simple for a data science solution."
"The visualizations are great. It makes it very easy to understand which model is working and why."
"Scalability, in terms of running experiments concurrently is good. At max, I was able to run three different experiments concurrently."
"I find Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio advantageous because it allows integration with Titan Scratch and offers an easy-to-use drag-and-drop menu for developing machine learning models."
 

Cons

"Running this solution requires a minimum of 12GB to 16GB of RAM."
"The tool's MLOps is not good. It's pricing also needs to improve."
"​It could use to add some more features in data transformation, time series and the text analytics section."
"The pricing policy should be improved."
"The speed of deployment should be faster, as should testing."
"Integration with social media would be a valuable enhancement."
"I think it should be made cheaper for certain people…It may appear costlier for those who don't consider time important."
"The solution must increase the amount of data sources that can be integrated."
"Operability with R could be improved."
"The AutoML feature is very basic and they should improve it by using a more robust algorithm."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is expensive."
"We pay only the Azure costs for what we use, which involves some subscription costs. But essentially, you pay for what you use. There are no extra costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"There is a license required for this solution."
"I am paying for it following a pay-as-you-go. So, the more I use it, the more it costs."
"I rate the product price as a nine on a scale of one to ten, where ten means it is very expensive."
"When we got our first models and were ready for the user acceptance testing, our licensing fees were between €2,500 ($2,750 USD) and €3,000 ($3,300 USD) monthly."
"The licensing cost is very cheap. It's less than $50 a month."
"From a developer's perspective, I find the price of this solution high."
"To use MLS is fairly cheap. Even the paid account is something like $20/month, unless you are provisioning large numbers of VMs for a Hadoop cluster. The main MS makes money with this solution is forcing the user to deploy their model on REST API, and being charged each time the API is accessed. There are several pricing tiers for the API. If you do not use the API, then value of MLS is to create rapid experiments ($20/month). The resulting model is not exportable to use, thus you’ll have to recreate the algorithms in either R or Python, which is what I did. MLS results gave me a direction to work with, the actual work is mostly done in R and Python outside of MLS."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Science Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
34%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cloudera Data Science Workbench?
I appreciate CDSW's ability to logically segregate environments, such as data, DR, and production, ensuring they don't interfere with each other. The deployment of machine learning is fast and easy...
What needs improvement with Cloudera Data Science Workbench?
The tool's MLOps is not good. It's pricing also needs to improve.
What is your primary use case for Cloudera Data Science Workbench?
We have different use cases. Our banking use case uses machine learning to identify customer life events and recommend the best-suited card products. These machine-learning models are deployed in o...
Which do you prefer - Databricks or Azure Machine Learning Studio?
Databricks gives you the option of working with several different languages, such as SQL, R, Scala, Apache Spark, or Python. It offers many different cluster choices and excellent integration with ...
What do you like most about Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio?
The learning curve is very low. Operationalizing the model is also very easy within the Azure ecosystem.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio?
Pricing is considered to be top-segment and should be improved. I rate the pricing as three or four on a scale of one to ten in terms of affordability.
 

Also Known As

CDSW
Azure Machine Learning, MS Azure Machine Learning Studio
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IQVIA, Rush University Medical Center, Western Union
Walgreens Boots Alliance, Schneider Electric, BP
Find out what your peers are saying about Cloudera Data Science Workbench vs. Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.