We performed a comparison between IBM MQ and Red Hat AMQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"We like IBM MQ for our synchronous communications and transactional applications that require a lot of CPS."
"Reliable messaging and throughput are the most valuable."
"The most valuable feature of IBM MQ is it has all the features necessary for contemporary messaging, not only for the financial industry but for any application."
"A stable and reliable software that offers good integration between different systems."
"This product has good security."
"The usability of the solution is very good."
"The solution is easy to use and has good performance."
"IBM is still adding some features and coding some other systems on the security end. However, it has the most security features I've seen in a communication solution. Security is the most important thing for our purposes."
"This product is well adopted on the OpenShift platform. For organizations like ours that use OpenShift for many of our products, this is a good feature."
"The solution is very lightweight, easy to configure, simple to manage, and robust since it launched."
"The most valuable feature for us is the operator-based automation that is provided by Streams for infrastructure as well as user and topic management. This saves a lot of time and effort on our part to provide infrastructure. For example, the deployment of infrastructure is reduced from approximately a week to a day."
"IBM MQ's pricing is higher than its competitors'."
"I would like to see message duplication included."
"We would like to see the IBM technical support team extend their hand to providing support for other cloud vendors like Azure, Google Cloud, and AWS"
"Sometimes, not all messages are consumed in the queues. File transfers need improvement."
"It could always be more stable and secure."
"The solution requires a lot of work to implement and maintain."
"The user interface should be enhanced to include more monitoring features and other metrics. The metrics should include not only those from the IBM MQ point of view but also CPU and memory utilization."
"With IBM products, there's less marketing. If they do more demos and more seminars on their products, it will be very useful. On a given day. I get seminar invites for many vendors and products, but for IBM, I may get an invite once or twice a year."
"There are some aspects of the monitoring that could be improved on. There is a tool that is somewhat connected to Kafka called Service Registry. This is a product by Red Hat that I would like to see integrated more tightly."
"This product needs better visualization capabilities in general."
"There is improvement needed to keep the support libraries updated."
IBM MQ is ranked 1st in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 31 reviews while Red Hat AMQ is ranked 7th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 3 reviews. IBM MQ is rated 8.2, while Red Hat AMQ is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of IBM MQ writes "Reliable and stable software with good integration but the file transfer process needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat AMQ writes "Flexible, cost-effective, good compatibility with the OpenShift platform, effective and timely support". IBM MQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, VMware RabbitMQ, ActiveMQ, Anypoint MQ and TIBCO Enterprise Message Service, whereas Red Hat AMQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, ActiveMQ, VMware RabbitMQ, IBM Event Streams and Amazon SQS. See our IBM MQ vs. Red Hat AMQ report.
See our list of best Message Queue (MQ) Software vendors.
We monitor all Message Queue (MQ) Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
