TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    IBM Confluent

    Score8.6 out of 10
    N/AIBM Confluent helps enterprises stream, connect, process, govern and serve real-time data across hybrid environments.

    $385

    per month

    RabbitMQ

    Score9.6 out of 10
    N/ARabbitMQ, an open source message broker, is part of Pivotal Software, a VMware company acquired in 2019, and supports message queue, multiple messaging protocols, and more. RabbitMQ is available open source, however VMware also offers a range of commercial services for RabbitMQ; these are available as part of the Pivotal App Suite.N/A
    Pricing
    IBM ConfluentRabbitMQ
    Editions & Modules
    Basic
    $0
    Standard
    Starting at ~$385
    per month
    Enterprise
    Starting at ~$1,150
    per month
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    IBM ConfluentRabbitMQ
    Free Trial
    NoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    YesNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional DetailsConfluent monthly bills are based upon resource consumption, i.e., you are only charged for the resources you use when you actually use them: Stream: Kafka clusters are billed for eCKUs/CKUs ($/hour), networking ($/GB), and storage ($/GB-hour). Connect: Use of connectors is billed based on throughput ($/GB) and a task base price ($/task/hour). Process: Use of stream processing with Confluent Cloud for Apache Flink is calculated based on CFUs ($/minute). Govern: Use of Stream Governance is billed based on environment ($/hour). Confluent storage and throughput is calculated in binary gigabytes (GB), where 1 GB is 2^30 bytes. This unit of measurement is also known as a gibibyte (GiB). Please also note that all prices are stated in United States Dollars unless specifically stated otherwise. All billing computations are conducted in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC).—
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    IBM ConfluentRabbitMQ
    Considered Both Products
    IBM
    No answer on this topic
    Open Source
    No answer on this topic
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    94%
    Would buy again
    17 Answers
    91%
    Would buy again
    10 Answers
    Delivers good value for the price
    100%
    Delivers good value for the price
    14 Answers
    100%
    Delivers good value for the price
    11 Answers
    Happy with the feature set
    94%
    Happy with the feature set
    17 Answers
    91%
    Happy with the feature set
    10 Answers
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    86%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    12 Answers
    100%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    7 Answers
    Implementation went as expected
    88%
    Implementation went as expected
    15 Answers
    100%
    Implementation went as expected
    11 Answers
    Best Alternatives
    IBM ConfluentRabbitMQ
    Small Businesses
    Amazon SNS
    Score8.8 out of 10
    No answers on this topic
    Medium-sized Companies
    Amazon SNS
    Score8.8 out of 10
    Apache Kafka
    Score8.9 out of 10
    Enterprises
    Google Cloud Pub/Sub
    Score8.8 out of 10
    Apache Kafka
    Score8.9 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    IBM ConfluentRabbitMQ
    Likelihood to Recommend
    7.6
    (18 ratings)
    9.9
    (11 ratings)
    Usability
    7.4
    (16 ratings)
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    Support Rating
    10.0
    (1 ratings)
    6.5
    (4 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    IBM ConfluentRabbitMQ
    Likelihood to Recommend
    IBM
    Very reliable product and help with streaming messages without fail which is a significant confidence booster as an SRE leader. Would recommend the product considering the fact that now it is backed by IBM in addition to all IBM Confluent was doing well before the acquisition. Has been a game changer for our organization
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    It is highly recommended that if you have microservices architecture and if you want to solve 2 phase commit issue, you should use RabbitMQ for communication between microservices. It is a quick and reliable mode of communication between microservices. It is also helpful if you want to implement a job and worker mechanism. You can push the jobs into RabbitMQ and that will be sent to the consumer. It is highly reliable so you won't miss any jobs and you can also implement a retry of jobs with the dead letter queue feature. It will be also helpful in time-consuming API. You can put time-consuming items into a queue so they will be processed later and your API will be quick.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    IBM
    • It works really well in providing data context for our customers.
    • It is helpful in real time data streaming.
    • It is really wonderful tool for doing data validations and massaging the data.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    • What RabbitMQ does well is what it's advertised to do. It is good at providing lots of high volume, high availability queue. We've seen it handle upwards of 10 million messages in its queues, spread out over 200 queues before its publish/consume rates dipped. So yeah, it can definitely handle a lot of messages and a lot of queues. Depending on the size of the machine RabbitMQ is running on, I'm sure it can handle more.
    • Decent number of plugins! Want a plugin that gives you an interface to view all the queues and see their publish/consume rates? Yes, there's one for that. Want a plugin to "shovel" messages from one queue to another in an emergency? Check. Want a plugin that does extra logging for all the messages received? Got you covered!
    • Lots of configuration possibilities. We've tuned over 100 settings over the past year to get the performance and reliability just right. This could be a downside though--it's pretty confusing and some settings were hard to understand.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    IBM
    • Iit needs to improve in AI agents usage.
    • It needs to be more user friendly.
    • It is too complicated for beginners.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    • It breaks communication if we don't acknowledge early. In some cases our work items are time consuming that will take a time and in that scenario we are getting errors that RabbitMQ broke the channel. It will be good if RabbitMQ provides two acknowledgements, one is for that it has been received at client side and second ack is client is completed the processing part.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Usability
    IBM
    Kafka and Schema Registry are the rock solid fully managed offerings from IBM Confluent Cloud. Other than that the rest of the offerings do not work as expected.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    RabbitMQ is very easy to configure for all supported languages (Python, Java, etc.). I have personally used it on Raspberry Pi devices via a Flask Python API as well as in Java applications. I was able to learn it quickly and now have full mastery of it. I highly recommend it for any IoT project.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    IBM
    The support from the Confluent platform is great and satisfying. We have been working with Confluent for more than a year now. They sent out resident architects to help us set up Confluent cluster on our cloud and help us troubleshoot problems we have encountered. Overall, it has been a great experience working with the Confluent Platform.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    I gave it a 10 but we do not have a support contract with any company for RabbitMQ so there is no official support in that regard. However, there is a community and questions asked on StackOverflow or any other major question and answer site will usually get a response.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    IBM
    For our use case it was very important that the technology we were working with fit into our Azure architecture, and met our data processing size requirements to stream data within certain SLAs. Confluent more than met our performance requirements and compared to the others scale options and cost to run it was more than financially viable as a platform solution to our global operations.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    RabbitMQ has a few advantages over Azure Service Bus 1) RMQ handles substantially larger files - ASB tops out at 100MB, we use RabbitMQfor files over 200MB 2) RabbitMQ can be easily setup on prem - Azure Service Bus is cloud only 3) RabbitMQ exchanges are easier to configure over ASB subscriptions ASB has a few advantages too 1) Cloud based - just a few mouse clicks and you're up and running
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    IBM
    • IBM Confluent helps us get data moving from system to system at near real time.
    • IBM Confluent makes pushing data into a data lake easy - analytics, targeted deals, etc
    • The RBAC and ACL setup helps us govern and secure our data, even between teams/applications.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    • Positive: we don't need to keep way too many backend machines around to deal with bursts because RabbitMQ can absorb and buffer bursts long enough to let an understaffed set of backend services to catch up on processing. Hard to put a number to it but we probably save $5k a month having fewer machines around.
    • Negative: we've got many angry customers due to queues suddenly disappearing and dropping our messages when we try to publish to them afterward. Ideally, RabbitMQ should warn the user when queues expire due to inactivity but it doesn't, and due to our own bugs we've lost a lot of customer data as a result.
    • Positive: makes decoupling the web and API services from the deeper backend services easier by providing queues as an interface. This allowed us to split up our teams and have them develop independently of each other, speeding up software development.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots