Neo4j Graph Database vs ScyllaDB comparison

Read 12 ScyllaDB reviews

2,458 Views
1,508 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

Neo4j Graph Database

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 7, 2025

Neo4j Graph Database and ScyllaDB are competitive in the data management space. Neo4j is strong in handling complex graph-based queries, whereas ScyllaDB stands out in scalability and high throughput for large datasets.

Features: Neo4j supports complex relationship queries, advanced graph data modeling, and offers the Cypher query language for enhanced data insights. ScyllaDB provides high-performance wide-column data handling, automatic sharding for scalability, and supports distributed data processing with user-defined types for data consistency.

Room for Improvement: Neo4j could improve on cost-efficiency and expanding its adoption in non-graph use cases. Its complexity in integrating with certain data types could be enhanced. Also, performance in scenarios with fewer graph relationships could be optimized. ScyllaDB might address the clarity of configuration options and reduce the dependency on specialized knowledge for setup. Furthermore, handling very high volumes more efficiently and improving ease of data migration from other systems are potential improvement areas.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Neo4j offers comprehensive documentation and extensive community support, making setup more accessible. Its interface is user-friendly and provides substantial training resources. ScyllaDB, with its simplified deployment, offers robust scalability and easy configuration adjustments, but benefits from having dedicated DevOps personnel for optimal operation.

Pricing and ROI: Neo4j can be costly upfront but delivers significant ROI in terms of its advanced graph capabilities, particularly for applications that benefit from deep insights derived from data relationships. ScyllaDB, with a cost-effective scalability model, offers an attractive ROI for large-scale deployments demanding high throughput, aligning its pricing structure with its focus on distributed data processing.

To learn more, read our detailed Neo4j Graph Database vs. ScyllaDB Report (Updated: January 2025).

Neo4j Graph Database vs. ScyllaDB

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 831,265 peers since 2012

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

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

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Neo4j Graph Database is 4.0%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ScyllaDB is 11.5%, up from 8.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

NoSQL Databases

Featured Reviews

Azharuddin Mohammed

Full-stack Developer at ImageVision.ai

A flexible database with good documentation

If someone asks me whether to use Neo4j Graph Database, I'd want to know what they're building. I'd recommend it based on their use case. If it meets their needs, I'd suggest it. I recommend starting with the tool even for those exploring graph databases. It's been around since about 2010 and is better than other graph databases in many ways. Learning the tool depends on the programming language you're using. We had some challenges with Golang due to limited library support. However, Neo4j is easier to use with Node.js, JavaScript, or Python. Overall, I'd rate the tool eight to nine out of ten. It offers great features, scalability, and flexibility and has good documentation. It's easy to learn. However, every database has pros and cons, so the rating might change when comparing it to other graph databases.

Read full review

ArpitShah

Software Analyst at CLSA

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Enables people to understand what the business problem is and how the technology helps."

"For now, the tool doesn't break down or stop, so it is quite stable."

"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."

"Creates the ability to visualize outputs."

"As a graph database, I am surprised at their performance and response time."

"The product's most valuable features are efficiency and reliability."

"It is lightweight, and it requires less infrastructure."

"I like how fast it is to query data from the ScyllaDB node!"

"The performance aspects of Scylla are good, as always... A good point about Scylla is that it can be used extensively."

"ScyllaDB is fast and reliable. It has good performance."

"The documentation is good. It integrates easily with our existing data infrastructure."

"The database is easy to use, fast, and accessible for applications because the API is straightforward."

"ScyllaDB allows fine-tuning of the table structure. Speed is probably the most critical factor because we perform a lot of heavy data ingestion. One of its core features is its ability to handle high volumes and maintain speed when accessing data. Additionally, high availability and partitioning are built-in features of ScyllaDB."

More ScyllaDB pros

Cons

"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."

"There are concerns about performance and whether the tool can necessarily scale to provide the solution."

"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 documentation of Scylla is an area with shortcomings and needs to be improved."

"The product needs to add more features and improve the response time of the support team."

"ScyllaDB needs to improve its handling of transactions."

"The documentation is not well established for new developers."

"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."

"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."

"Some of the regular commands in NoSQL do not work."

More ScyllaDB cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is not expensive."

"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 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."

"It's a bit expensive."

"I believe that there is a yearly licensing cost and that it's expensive."

"It is an expensive tool compared to its competitor."

"It's free."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NoSQL Databases solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Energy/Utilities Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Media Company

Comms Service Provider

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 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 databa...

What is your primary use case for Neo4j Graph Database?

We're building a social media platform, which is a great use case for the product. It helps connect people. For example, if we're friends on Facebook, I can get suggestions for people near me or re...

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...

MongoDB vs Neo4j Graph Database

Comparisons

Compared 17% of the time

SingleStore vs Neo4j Graph Database

Compared 13% of the time

SQL Server vs Neo4j Graph Database

Compared 11% of the time

Aerospike Database 7 vs Neo4j Graph Database

Compared 11% of the time

Cassandra vs Neo4j Graph Database

Compared 9% of the time

More Neo4j Graph Database Competitors

Couchbase vs ScyllaDB

Compared 21% of the time

Aerospike Database 7 vs ScyllaDB

Compared 13% of the time

MongoDB vs ScyllaDB

Compared 13% of the time

Cassandra vs ScyllaDB

Compared 11% of the time

Oracle NoSQL vs ScyllaDB

Compared 3% of the time

More ScyllaDB Competitors

Product Reports

Download Neo4j Graph Database product report

Neo4j Graph Database

January 2025

Download ScyllaDB product report

December 2024

Learn More

Neo4j

Overview

Neo4j is the graph database solution allowing the analysis of complex relationships and patterns in data, leading to better decision-making and improved business processes. The graph database offers easy data integration from multiple sources, providing a more comprehensive view.

The most valuable aspect of a graph database is its performance and response time, as it does not use the join function and only has nodes and raw data. Overall, Neo4j, as a global first-ranking solution, has helped organizations become more efficient and effective in data analysis and decision-making processes.

ScyllaDB is an open-source, distributed NoSQL wide-column datastore (a highly scalable NoSQL database), known for its compatibility with Apache Cassandra, and for supporting the same protocols as Cassandra (CQL and Thrift) and the same file formats (SSTable). ScyllaDB is designed for high throughput and low latency, making it suitable for data-intensive applications. Its architecture allows it to deliver remarkable performance on a massive scale, utilizing modern multi-core servers to their fullest potential

ScyllaDB utilizes a similar architecture, data format, and query language as Apache Cassandra, providing compatibility while dramatically improving speed and scalability.

The key advantages of ScyllaDB include its rewritten C++ implementation that eliminates Cassandra's expensive Java garbage collection pauses, built-in caching for fast access to frequently used data, and shard-aware drivers for direct routing of requests. This enables it to fully leverage modern multi-core servers for massive parallelism. The community is active and the latest major release, ScyllaDB Enterprise 2023.1.0 LTS, incorporates over 5,000 code commits focused on enhancing capabilities.

ScyllaDB supports wide-column data modeling for fast read performance at scale. It includes integrated monitoring and management tools to track database health and performance. For organizations looking to boost speed and reduce costs for NoSQL workloads, ScyllaDB offers a drop-in replacement for Cassandra that delivers lower latency, higher throughput, and increased scalability with fewer nodes. Its seamless migration path makes switching from Cassandra seamless, requiring minimal code changes.

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