TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Azure Machine Learning vs. IBM Cloud Functions

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Azure Machine Learning

    Score8.2 out of 10
    N/AMicrosoft's Azure Machine Learning is and end-to-end data science and analytics solution that helps professional data scientists to prepare data, develop experiments, and deploy models in the cloud. It replaces the Azure Machine Learning Workbench.

    $0

    per month

    IBM Cloud Functions

    Score6.5 out of 10
    N/AIBM Cloud Functions is a PaaS platform based on Apache OpenWhisk. With it, developers write code (“actions”) that respond to external events. Actions are hosted, executed, and scaled on demand based on the number of events coming in. No servers or infrastructure to provision and manage.

    $0

    per second of execution

    Pricing
    Azure Machine LearningIBM Cloud Functions
    Editions & Modules
    Studio Pricing - Free
    $0.00
    per month
    Production Web API - Dev/Test
    $0.00
    per month
    Studio Pricing - Standard
    $9.99
    per ML studio workspace/per month
    Production Web API - Standard S1
    $100.13
    per month
    Production Web API - Standard S2
    $1000.06
    per month
    Production Web API - Standard S3
    $9999.98
    per month
    Basic Cloud Functions Rate
    $0.00017
    per second of execution
    API Gateway Rate
    Free
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Azure Machine LearningIBM Cloud Functions
    Free Trial
    NoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    Best Alternatives
    Azure Machine LearningIBM Cloud Functions
    Small Businesses
    TensorFlow
    Score7.6 out of 10
    AWS Lambda
    Score8.3 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    Google Cloud AI
    Score8.7 out of 10
    AWS Lambda
    Score8.3 out of 10
    Enterprises
    Google Cloud AI
    Score8.7 out of 10
    AWS Lambda
    Score8.3 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Azure Machine LearningIBM Cloud Functions
    Likelihood to Recommend
    6.0
    (5 ratings)
    3.0
    (7 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    7.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Usability
    7.0
    (2 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Support Rating
    7.9
    (2 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Implementation Rating
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Azure Machine LearningIBM Cloud Functions
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Microsoft
    I would highly recommend Azure machine learning design for those with less access to high-end computing infrastructure, as using Azure saves a lot of time, money, and effort by providing a hustle-free platform that is easy to use and train your employees on. On the other hand, if you are looking for complete control of the machine learning model you create and would like to add detailed functionalities and try different algorithms, then Azure is less suitable here as it’s very high level.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    IBM Cloud Functions [is] not the worse product on the IBM cloud. I decided to write this review as I thought it would be balanced. I would still use functions to set up a serverless architecture where execution time is pretty quick and the code is relatively simple. I wouldn't use IBM Cloud Functions for async calls obviously, as costs could be higher. The functions documentation is lacking in terms of CI/CD, and there are unexplainable errors occurring - like the network connection that I mentioned. So I wouldn't just rely on IBM Cloud Functions too much for the entire system, but make sure it's diversified.
    Read full review
    Pros
    Microsoft
    • Easy to create the experiment.
    • Easy to adopt the best algorithm.
    • Efficient way to deploy the model as a web service.
    • Centralized platform for the life cycle of machine learning goal.
    Read full review
    IBM
    • Great substitute for a simple API calls to run non-complicated code.
    • Easy way to run Python/Java/Javascript to get something done.
    • File validation.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Microsoft
    • Few models: Even though it has a lot of Machine Learning models, it is quite limited when compared to R. Most Data Scientists still use and prefer R, so the newest models tend to release as R libraries. With Azure ML, we need to wait for Microsoft to evaluate and decide if including a new model is a good idea or not
    • Tableau interface: last time I checked there was no easy way to connect with Tableau.
    • Cloud based: You always need a good internet connection to use it.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    • Billing can be a hassle, not the most responsive customer service/support team
    • Handles & executes most functionalities, but other platforms offer more scalability if you're seeking consistent and stable growth
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Usability
    Microsoft
    Good UX/UI and overall good usability, but it takes a while to get used to the product & platform. The whole design seems fragmented with little in terms of integration with project management tools such as JIRA, or wireframing. Overall it feels like an unfinished product that's meant for teaching more than for production.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    No answers on this topic
    Support Rating
    Microsoft
    I'm satisfied with the Azure Machine Learning Studio- it fulfilled my goal in a single channel. Even haven't worr[ied] about the maintenance or any fault tolerance. This provide[s] the user interactive UI to grab the features easily. [Their] support teams also very help[ful], they stand with us at any time.
    Read full review
    IBM
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation Rating
    Microsoft
    Not sure
    Read full review
    IBM
    No answers on this topic
    Alternatives Considered
    Microsoft
    It is easier to learn, it has a very cost effective license for use, it has native build and created for Azure cloud services, and that makes it perfect when compared against the alternatives. As a Microsoft tool, it has been built to contain many visual features and improved usability even for non-specialist users.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    • ICF is a lightweight service and does not require runtime configurations
    • Scalable on demand and hence there is no need to pay for runtime costs
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    Microsoft
    • Reduce energy consumption caused by GPUs.
    • Saves on recycling and transporting costs and maintenance caused by buying high-end equipment.
    • Improve productivity as building products using Azure is easier than building everything up from scratch (e.g., machine learning and AI applications).
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    • It directly affected our expenses since we do not need to deploy and maintain a set of separate applications.
    • It allowed us to pay for only the amount of time cloud functions run.
    • It saved on maintenance and monitoring of the applications it replaced.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots