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

Hugging Face vs Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 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

Hugging Face
Ranking in AI Development Platforms
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Azure Machine Lea...
Ranking in AI Development Platforms
3rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
Data Science Platforms (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the AI Development Platforms category, the mindshare of Hugging Face is 13.2%, up from 6.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio is 8.0%, down from 15.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
AI Development Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

SwaminathanSubramanian - PeerSpot reviewer
Versatility empowers AI concept development despite the multi-GPU challenge
Regarding scalability, I'm finding the multi-GPU aspect of it challenging. Training the model is another hurdle, although I'm only getting into that aspect currently. Organizations are apprehensive about investing in multi-GPU setups. Additionally, data cleanup is a challenge that needs to be resolved, as data must be mature and pristine.
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 tool's most valuable feature is that it's open-source and has hundreds of packages already available. This makes it quite helpful for creating our LLMs."
"I would rate this product nine out of ten."
"I like that Hugging Face is versatile in the way it has been developed."
"There are numerous libraries available, and the documentation is rich and step-by-step, helping us understand which model to use in particular conditions."
"The product is reliable."
"I appreciate the versatility and the fact that it has generalized many models."
"My preferred aspects are natural language processing and question-answering."
"It is stable."
"The solution's most beneficial feature is its integration with Azure."
"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."
"I like being able to compare results across different training runs. The hyperparameter tuning function is a valuable feature because it provides the ability to run multiple experiments at the same time and compare results."
"The solution is easy to use and has good automation capabilities in conjunction with Azure DevOps."
"MLS allows me to set up data experiments by running through various regression and other machine learning algorithms, with different data cleaning and treatment tools. All of this can be achieved via drag and drop, and a few clicks of the mouse."
"The platform as a service provides user-friendly instruments, making the experience easy."
"The integration with Azure services enhances workflow and meets my expectations."
"Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio is easy to use and deploy."
 

Cons

"Implementing a cloud system to showcase historical data would be beneficial."
"Hugging Face could improve by implementing a search engine or chat bot feature similar to ChatGPT."
"I've worked on three projects using Hugging Face, and only once did we encounter a problem with the code. We had to use another open-source embedding from OpenAI to resolve it. Our team has three members: me, my colleague, and a team leader. We looked at the problem and resolved it."
"Most people upload their pre-trained models on Hugging Face, but more details should be added about the models."
"I believe Hugging Face has some room for improvement. There are some security issues. They provide code, but API tokens aren't indicated. Also, the documentation for particular models could use more explanation. But I think these things are improving daily. The main change I'd like to see is making the deployment of inference endpoints more customizable for users."
"The area that needs improvement would be the organization of the materials. It could be clearer and more systematic. It would be good if the layout was clear and we could search the models easily."
"Access to the models and datasets could be improved."
"Regarding scalability, I'm finding the multi-GPU aspect of it challenging. Training the model is another hurdle, although I'm only getting into that aspect currently."
"The data processor can pose a bit of a challenge, but the real complexity is determined by the skill of the implementation team."
"I think they should improve two things. They should make their user interface more user-friendly. Integration could also be better. Because Microsoft Machine Learning is a Microsoft product, it's fully integrated with Microsoft Azure but not fully supported for other platforms like IBM or AWS or something else."
"Easier customization and configuration would be beneficial."
"Microsoft should also include more examples and tutorials for using this product.​"
"Overall, the icons in the solution could be improved to provide better guidance to users. Additionally, the setup process for the solution could be made easier."
"Operability with R could be improved."
"I personally would prefer if data could be tunneled to my model through a SAP ERP system, and have features of Excel, such as Pivot Tables, integrated."
"Performance is very poor."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We do not have to pay for the product."
"So, it's requires expensive machines to open services or open LLM models."
"The tool is open-source. The cost depends on what task you're doing. If you're using a large language model with around 12 million parameters, it will cost more. On average, Hugging Face is open source so you can download models to your local machine for free. For deployment, you can use any cloud service."
"I recall seeing a fee of nine dollars, and there's also an enterprise option priced at twenty dollars per month."
"Hugging Face is an open-source solution."
"The solution is open source."
"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."
"There is a lack of certainty with the solution's pricing."
"There isn’t any such expensive costs and only a standard license is required."
"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."
"I used the free student license for a few months to operate the solution, but I'll have to pay for it if I want to do more now."
"From a developer's perspective, I find the price of this solution high."
"There is a license required for this solution."
"The product's pricing is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which AI Development Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
838,533 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Hugging Face?
My preferred aspects are natural language processing and question-answering.
What needs improvement with Hugging Face?
Access to the models and datasets could be improved. Many interesting ones are restricted. It would be great if they provided access for students or non-professionals who just want to test things.
What is your primary use case for Hugging Face?
This is a simple personal project, non-commercial. As a student, that's all I do.
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

No data available
Azure Machine Learning, MS Azure Machine Learning Studio
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Walgreens Boots Alliance, Schneider Electric, BP
Find out what your peers are saying about Hugging Face vs. Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,533 professionals have used our research since 2012.