No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Amazon SQS vs Red Hat AMQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 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

Amazon SQS
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat AMQ
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of Amazon SQS is 6.5%, down from 8.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat AMQ is 6.8%, down from 9.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Amazon SQS6.5%
Red Hat AMQ6.8%
Other86.7%
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Roberto Costa - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Data & AI Engineer at Imprint
Facilitates seamless queue creation and management for efficient application decoupling
If you need a messaging service to help decouple your application, Amazon SQS would be a smart choice because it's easy to use and very easy to manage Amazon SQS is a simple service to use. If we compare with other solutions such as RabbitMQ for messaging, Amazon SQS is easier to use and easier…
SachinJain - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Technical Specialist at Intuitive Technology Partners
Efficiently manages high availability and fault tolerance for critical systems with user-friendly management features
I have experience with features such as message persistence and fault tolerance because I configured high availability and fault tolerance for the client environment, including active-active and active-passive configurations. I mainly prefer active-active. I created a security feature for user authentication and authorization in Red Hat AMQ using vault. When you enable the vault, then your whole Red Hat AMQ becomes more secure. Management is straightforward. I configured it and created documentation. The operations team takes care of the operation part. I educate them on how to manage access, so they can easily add new people who join the company or manage the people who leave. The benefits of using Red Hat AMQ include easy configuration and monitoring. On the portal, I can monitor how many packets or alerts have been generated or sent to the end user via Red Hat AMQ along with messages or emails. It also shows utilization in the tool. These features also come with other AMQs such as Amazon and IBM.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the ability to decouple components."
"One of the useful features is the ability to schedule a call after a certain number of messages accumulate in the container. For example, if there are ten messages in the container, you can perform a specific action."
"For people who don't want any infrastructure and managing overhead, I recommend Amazon SQS."
"All Amazon Web Services resources are easy to configure."
"If we compare with other solutions such as RabbitMQ for messaging, Amazon SQS is easier to use and easier to create the queue."
"The scale it manages is quite impressive."
"We use SNS as the publisher, and our procurement service subscribes to those events using SQS. In the past, we relied on time-based or batch-based processes to send data between services on-premises. With SQS, we can trigger actions based on real-time changes in business processes, improving reliability."
"It works consistently and is economical under a standard non-FIFO model."
"My impression is that it is average in terms of scalability."
"AMQ is highly scalable and performs well. It can process a large volume of messages in one second. AMQ and OpenShift are a good combination."
"I can organize the tool with microservices, which allows me to use it across different services. It is easy to learn."
"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 self-service aspect is very important for us, and AMQ Streams has enabled us to deliver new services faster, going from days to hours."
"The solution is very lightweight, easy to configure, simple to manage, and robust since it launched."
"Reliability is the main criterion for selecting this tool for one of the busiest airports in Mumbai."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
 

Cons

"A primary area of improvement for Amazon SQS is the message size limitation, which is currently restricted to 256 kilobytes per message."
"For Amazon SQS, in particular, I think AWS Management Console has shortcomings. AWS Management Console should be a better pluggable option to help users with some integrations."
"The initial setup of Amazon SQS is in the middle range of difficulty. You need to learn Amazon AWS and know how to navigate, create resources, and structures, and provide rules."
"The search should be more user-friendly, allowing me to search for a longer period of time and return results faster."
"There is room for improvement in handling large-scale data."
"Improvement is needed in terms of troubleshooting and logs."
"The solution is not available on-premises so that rules out any customers looking for the messaging solution on-premises."
"The retention period for messages could be improved. Currently, messages are retained for four or seven days."
"The product needs to improve its documentation and training."
"The turnaround of adopting new versions of underlying technologies sometimes is too slow."
"There is improvement needed to keep the support libraries updated."
"There are some aspects of the monitoring that could be improved on."
"This product needs better visualization capabilities in general."
"This product needs better visualization capabilities in general."
"Red Hat AMQ's cost could be improved, and it could have better integration."
"There is improvement needed to keep the support libraries updated."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the tool's pricing a nine out of ten."
"The pricing model is pay-as-you-use. It depends on your usage and configuration."
"It's quite expensive."
"Compared to the other options and based on what I have heard, Amazon SQS is relatively more expensive, but it is not insanely expensive."
"The pricing of Amazon SQS is reasonable. The first million requests are free every month, and after, it's cost 40 cents for every million requests. There are not any additional fees."
"Compared to EC2 and other services, Amazon SQS' pricing is cheaper."
"Amazon SQS is more affordable compared to other solutions."
"SQS's pricing is very good - I would rate it nine out of ten."
"Red Hat AMQ's pricing could be improved."
"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, with ten being expensive."
"This is a very cost-effective solution and the pricing is much better than competitors."
"The solution is open-source."
"There is a subscription needed for this solution and there are support plans available."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon SQS?
There is nothing I can remember that I would want as new features for Amazon SQS.
What is your primary use case for Amazon SQS?
If you need a messaging service to help decouple your application, Amazon SQS would be a smart choice because it's easy to use and very easy to manage.
What advice do you have for others considering Amazon SQS?
I would recommend Amazon SQS to other people. On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution a 10.
What needs improvement with Red Hat AMQ?
The areas for improvement include cost, which is a primary concern. The deployment process is simple, but the cost is very important. Additionally, the management portal should be more user-friendl...
What is your primary use case for Red Hat AMQ?
For use cases for Red Hat AMQ, let's take banking purposes. This depends upon the firm or the service or product company. For example, let's take HDFC Bank or any other bank. Whenever a customer de...
What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat AMQ?
I work primarily with Red Hat. For IBM, I have worked with their channel partner, not directly with IBM. For Amazon, I work with partners only. I am working with one company as a consultant. I also...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Red Hat JBoss A-MQ, Red Hat JBoss AMQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

EMS, NASA, BMW, Capital One
E*TRADE, CERN, CenturyLink, AECOM, Sabre Holdings
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon SQS vs. Red Hat AMQ and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.