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

Neo4j Graph Database vs ScyllaDB comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 7, 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

Neo4j Graph Database
Ranking in NoSQL Databases
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ScyllaDB
Ranking in NoSQL Databases
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Neo4j Graph Database is 4.1%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ScyllaDB is 10.6%, up from 9.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
NoSQL Databases
 

Featured Reviews

RT
Delivers superior search and data aggregation capabilities
Neo4j helps with advanced search needs, providing good search results and aggregates compared to MongoDB. Aggregating with MongoDB can be difficult; however, with Neo4j, it's easier. Aggregating data, backing up, and creating new clusters are user-friendly from the back end. In DevOps web deployment, we noticed no database issues. We created Docker instances and set them up efficiently, managing databases up to 50 gigabytes.
ArpitShah - PeerSpot reviewer
Self-hosting complexity and the way ScyllaDB counts operations can be confusing and may not reflect actual usage
It seems we have better options available. So probably don't go for ScyllaDB. The reason is, first, it's very high. It's not as straightforward as, like, Postgres or ClickHouse to set up. It requires a complex setup. The other problem is what they call. For example, they will say that for up to a million operations, you experience this. But the problem is if they have nine servers, then your one operation is counted as nine operations, not one. So, even though you have one write, they count it as nine. It's like it's just not false premises. You can always host it yourself, but then it's way more complex. The benefits are not substantially more than those of other databases. It's not that it's slow or anything. It's good enough and all. But it's just that ClickHouse or other databases are simpler and faster and probably provide more features. So, I kind of burn out from the database, and that's why I would keep it small.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution's best feature is how it differs from traditional SQL databases. It's hard to map people and find those near me in SQL, which requires long, complex queries. Neo4j Graph Database makes this easier with simpler queries. It also supports more data types, like JSON, which SQL doesn't."
"It is good for search-based tasks, providing solid search results and aggregate results."
"Creates the ability to visualize outputs."
"Enables people to understand what the business problem is and how the technology helps."
"As a graph database, I am surprised at their performance and response time."
"For now, the tool doesn't break down or stop, so it is quite stable."
"It is lightweight, and it requires less infrastructure."
"The product's most valuable features are efficiency and reliability."
"The documentation is good. It integrates easily with our existing data infrastructure."
"The performance aspects of Scylla are good, as always... A good point about Scylla is that it can be used extensively."
"I like how fast it is to query data from the ScyllaDB node!"
"ScyllaDB is fast and reliable. It has good performance."
"The performance and scalability are good, and we hardly see any major issues with ScyllaDB."
"The database is easy to use, fast, and accessible for applications because the API is straightforward."
 

Cons

"There are concerns about performance and whether the tool can necessarily scale to provide the solution."
"The only problem is that the community is quite small."
"The tool could improve by having more resources, especially for Golang, which we use. It lacks good basic libraries and doesn't have an ORM (Object-Relational Mapping) tool, which many NoSQL databases have. We thought about building an ORM for the Neo4j Graph Database but are too busy."
"For me, when the tool was deployed on an on-premises model, it was a little bit difficult the first time."
"So far, we have not had any issues and are happy with the product in general."
"The documentation of Scylla is an area with shortcomings and needs to be improved."
"From a sales pitch standpoint, it needs to deliver on promises of better ROI and compaction."
"If you don't have the best computing resources, then it's not easy to set up. In such cases, we have to run ScyllaDB in developer mode."
"We faced several challenges while integrating ScyllaDB into our AWS environment. One common issue was that a security port wasn’t opened on one node, preventingdata synchronization across clusters. We noticed the data wasn’t syncing correctly when we saw different record counts in other regions. After investigating, we found that the port was closed in one AWS region. Once we opened the port, the data synchronization across all nodes resumed as expected."
"The product needs to add more features and improve the response time of the support team."
"ScyllaDB needs to improve its handling of transactions."
"Data export, along with how we can purchase the data periodically, needs to be improved so that the storage is within control. Then, we could optimize it even better."
"The documentation is not well established for new developers."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is open source so that you can use it for free. They also offer an enterprise version with its billing. If your company is earning well, I suggest using the enterprise version. Otherwise, you can deploy it on your own cloud and pay based on usage."
"The tool is not expensive."
"It is an expensive tool compared to its competitor."
"I believe that there is a yearly licensing cost and that it's expensive."
"It's free."
"It's a bit expensive."
"The paid version of ScyllaDB is not that expensive. The main advantage of the paid version is direct support from the ScyllaDB team, which can resolve issues faster—typically within a day, compared to two to three days with the free version. The paid version also offers better guidance and support, while the free version has good documentation and is more high-level. I’d rate their support team nine out of ten because of the quick responses from their community."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NoSQL Databases solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Energy/Utilities Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Hospitality Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Neo4j?
The solution is open source so that you can use it for free. They also offer an enterprise version with its billing. If your company is earning well, I suggest using the enterprise version. Otherwi...
What needs improvement with Neo4j Graph Database?
The only problem is that the community is quite small.
What is your primary use case for Neo4j Graph Database?
We have used Neo4j in microservices. In one of the microservices, we used Neo4j since we have some requirements similar to MongoDB plus Elasticsearch. It performs both functions. Instead of doing t...
What do you like most about Scylla?
The performance aspects of Scylla are good, as always... A good point about Scylla is that it can be used extensively.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Scylla?
The enterprise version comes with a cost of about $300,000 per year, however, we did not experience the promised compaction benefits.
What needs improvement with Scylla?
From a sales pitch standpoint, it needs to deliver on promises of better ROI and compaction. Additionally, ticketing and support systems could be improved due to the time it takes to get answers. T...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Telenor, Wazoku, Adidas, Cerved, GameSys, eBay, Schleich, ICIJ, die Bayerisch, Megree, InfoJobs, LinkedIn
IBM, Investing.com, mParticle, Comcast, GE, Fanatics, Ola, CERN, adgear, Samsung
Find out what your peers are saying about Neo4j Graph Database vs. ScyllaDB and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.