Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS) vs. Google Cloud Pub/Sub

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Amazon SQS
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
Amazon Web Services (AWS) Provides the Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS), a managed message queue service which supports the safe decoupling and distribution of different components in a cloud infrastructure and cloud applications.
$0
per GB
Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Google offers Cloud Pub/Sub, a managed message oriented middleware supporting many-to-many asynchronous messaging between applications.N/A
Pricing
Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS)Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Editions & Modules
All Data Transfer In
$0.00
per GB
Standard Queue
$0.00000004
per request
FIFO Queue
$0.00000005
per request
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Amazon SQSGoogle Cloud Pub/Sub
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS)Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Considered Both Products
Amazon SQS

No answer on this topic

Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Chose Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Having used Amazon Web Services SNS & SQS I can say that even if the latter may offer more features, Google Cloud Pub/Sub is easier to use. On the other hand, usage of SNS & SQS as well as documentation and troubleshooting is easier with the AWS solution.
Since we are not using …
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS)Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

Amazon SNS
Amazon SNS
Score 8.4 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.4 out of 10
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.4 out of 10
Enterprises
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.4 out of 10
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.4 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS)Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Likelihood to Recommend
7.1
(7 ratings)
9.4
(7 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(2 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(2 ratings)
9.8
(3 ratings)
Configurability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS)Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Likelihood to Recommend
Amazon AWS
If you are looking to build something that just requires a simple queue service (as the name implies) this is great for it. You might look elsewhere though if you get into more complicated needs. This is also very well suited if you are already using other services with AWS and intend to fully build whatever you are building in AWS. If you are looking for a mixed environment -- SQS is not for you
Read full review
Google
If you want to stream high volumes of data, be it for ETL streaming or event sourcing, Google Cloud Pub/Sub is your go-to tool. It's easy to learn, easy to observe its metrics and scales with ease without additional configuration so if you have more producers of consumers, all you need to do is to deploy on k8s your solutions so that you can perform autoscaling on your pods to adjust to the data volume. The DLQ is also very transparent and easy to configure. Your code will have no logic whatsoever regarding orchestrating pubsub, you just plug and play. However, if you are not in the Google Cloud Pub/Sub environment, you might have trouble or be most likely unable to use it since I think it's a product of Google Cloud.
Read full review
Pros
Amazon AWS
  • It provides an always-available serverless queue for workflows or mission-critical processes.
  • Is extremely low cost and overall costs to our environments have been negligible.
Read full review
Google
  • With a pub/sub architecture the consumer is decoupled in time from the publisher i.e. if the consumer goes down, it can replay any events that occurred during its downtime.
  • It also allows consumer to throttle and batch incoming data providing much needed flexibility while working with multiple types of data sources
  • A simple and easy to use UI on cloud console for setup and debugging
  • It enables event-driven architectures and asynchronous parallel processing, while improving performance, reliability and scalability
Read full review
Cons
Amazon AWS
  • Almost all of the functionality has been covered by SQS, but they could improve the throughput time.
  • Also, they could provide built-in Cloud Watch, so that we can easily configure it without any external efforts.
Read full review
Google
  • Would be nice if the queue could be extended beyond 7 days.
  • We found it a bit tricky replay unacknowledged messages when needed.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
Google
It serves all of our purposes in the most transparent way I can imagine, after seeing other message queueing providers, I can only attest to its quality.
Read full review
Usability
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
Google
It has many libraries in many languages, google provides either good guides or they're AI generated code libraries that are easy to understand. It has very good observability too.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
Google
I have never faced a single problem in 4 years.
Read full review
Performance
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
Google
It's very fast, can be even better if you use protobuf.
Read full review
Support Rating
Amazon AWS
Online blogging and documentation for SQS is great. There are many examples of implementing it and if you look hard enough, more than likely there are examples that meet the exact case with which you are working
Read full review
Google
They have decent documentation, but you need to pay for support. We weren't able to answer all our questions with the documentation and didn't have time to setup support before we needed it so I can't give it a higher rating but I think it tends to be a bit slow unless you're a GCP enterprise support customer.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Amazon AWS
The most comparable products are RabbitMQ, and perhaps ActiveMQ. Until recently, AWS did not offer a managed ActiveMQ product. Running RabbitMQ will never be to my team's competitive advantage; we wanted a managed service.
Read full review
Google
Having used Amazon Web Services SNS & SQS I can say that even if the latter may offer more features, Google Cloud Pub/Sub is easier to use. On the other hand, usage of SNS & SQS as well as documentation and troubleshooting is easier with the AWS solution. Since we are not using GCP only for Pub/Sub the choice depends on other variables.
Read full review
Scalability
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
Google
You can just plug in consumers at will and it will respond, there's no need for further configuration or introducing new concepts. You have a queue, if it's slow, you plug in more consumers to process more messages: simple as that.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Amazon AWS
  • Positive impact - time allocation towards different features
  • Negative impact - too many resources dedicated towards debugging
  • Positive impact - less manual labor during testing
Read full review
Google
  • Increased Efficiency with reliable and Google managed services up all the time wit Disaster Recovery in place as well
  • Definitely Lower costs being a cloud based solution and easier to setup
  • Faster Project delivery and go to market plan for the business use cases basis this technology at the back end
Read full review
ScreenShots