StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Utilities
  3. Background Jobs
  4. Message Queue
  5. Azure Service Bus vs WCF

Azure Service Bus vs WCF

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Azure Service Bus
Azure Service Bus
Stacks553
Followers536
Votes7
WCF
WCF
Stacks125
Followers107
Votes5

Azure Service Bus vs WCF: What are the differences?

Introduction

When it comes to choosing between Azure Service Bus and WCF (Windows Communication Foundation) for your messaging and communication needs, it's essential to understand the key differences between the two technologies. Below are the distinct features that differentiate Azure Service Bus from WCF.

  1. Messaging Protocol Compatibility: Azure Service Bus supports multiple messaging protocols like AMQP, MQTT, and HTTPS, whereas WCF primarily relies on SOAP-based communication protocols. This difference makes Azure Service Bus more versatile in accommodating various messaging requirements and technologies.

  2. Scalability and Elasticity: Azure Service Bus is a cloud-based service that provides high scalability and elasticity, allowing you to scale your applications based on demand without worrying about infrastructure limitations. On the other hand, WCF is traditionally more constrained by the resources of the hosting environment, making it difficult to achieve the same level of scalability and elasticity as Azure Service Bus.

  3. Cross-Platform Support: Azure Service Bus is designed to work seamlessly across different platforms and devices, making it an ideal choice for diverse and distributed environments. In contrast, WCF is more tailored towards Windows-based systems and may require additional configurations or adaptations to support cross-platform communication effectively.

  4. Service Hosting Differences: Azure Service Bus provides a fully managed cloud service for message queuing and pub/sub capabilities, eliminating the need for you to manage and maintain the underlying infrastructure. On the other hand, WCF requires you to host and manage your services either in IIS, self-hosted applications, or other hosting environments, which may involve more operational overhead.

  5. Integration with Azure Services: Azure Service Bus seamlessly integrates with other Azure services such as Azure Functions, Logic Apps, and Event Grid, enabling you to build robust and integrated solutions within the Azure ecosystem. While WCF can also integrate with Azure services, the level of integration and ease of use may not be as seamless as with Azure Service Bus.

  6. Pricing Model: Azure Service Bus offers a consumption-based pricing model where you pay only for what you use, allowing for cost-effective scaling based on your application's needs. In contrast, WCF typically involves upfront costs for infrastructure and maintenance, making it less flexible in terms of cost optimization and scalability.

In Summary, Azure Service Bus stands out for its diverse protocol support, scalability, cross-platform compatibility, managed service hosting, integration with Azure services, and consumption-based pricing model compared to WCF.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on Azure Service Bus, WCF

André
André

Technology Manager at GS1 Portugal - Codipor

Jul 30, 2020

Needs adviceon.NET Core.NET Core

Hello dear developers, our company is starting a new project for a new Web App, and we are currently designing the Architecture (we will be using .NET Core). We want to embark on something new, so we are thinking about migrating from a monolithic perspective to a microservices perspective. We wish to containerize those microservices and make them independent from each other. Is it the best way for microservices to communicate with each other via ESB, or is there a new way of doing this? Maybe complementing with an API Gateway? Can you recommend something else different than the two tools I provided?

We want something good for Cost/Benefit; performance should be high too (but not the primary constraint).

Thank you very much in advance :)

461k views461k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Azure Service Bus
Azure Service Bus
WCF
WCF

It is a cloud messaging system for connecting apps and devices across public and private clouds. You can depend on it when you need highly-reliable cloud messaging service between applications and services, even when one or more is offline.

It is a framework for building service-oriented applications. Using this, you can send data as asynchronous messages from one service endpoint to another. A service endpoint can be part of a continuously available service hosted by IIS, or it can be a service hosted in an application.

Statistics
Stacks
553
Stacks
125
Followers
536
Followers
107
Votes
7
Votes
5
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 4
    Easy Integration with .Net
  • 2
    Cloud Native
  • 1
    Use while high messaging need
Cons
  • 1
    Limited features in Basic tier
  • 1
    Observability of messages in the queue is lacking
  • 1
    Lacking in JMS support
  • 1
    Skills can only be used in Azure - vendor lock-in
Pros
  • 5
    Classes

What are some alternatives to Azure Service Bus, WCF?

Firebase

Firebase

Firebase is a cloud service designed to power real-time, collaborative applications. Simply add the Firebase library to your application to gain access to a shared data structure; any changes you make to that data are automatically synchronized with the Firebase cloud and with other clients within milliseconds.

Socket.IO

Socket.IO

It enables real-time bidirectional event-based communication. It works on every platform, browser or device, focusing equally on reliability and speed.

Kafka

Kafka

Kafka is a distributed, partitioned, replicated commit log service. It provides the functionality of a messaging system, but with a unique design.

RabbitMQ

RabbitMQ

RabbitMQ gives your applications a common platform to send and receive messages, and your messages a safe place to live until received.

Celery

Celery

Celery is an asynchronous task queue/job queue based on distributed message passing. It is focused on real-time operation, but supports scheduling as well.

PubNub

PubNub

PubNub makes it easy for you to add real-time capabilities to your apps, without worrying about the infrastructure. Build apps that allow your users to engage in real-time across mobile, browser, desktop and server.

Pusher

Pusher

Pusher is the category leader in delightful APIs for app developers building communication and collaboration features.

Amazon SQS

Amazon SQS

Transmit any volume of data, at any level of throughput, without losing messages or requiring other services to be always available. With SQS, you can offload the administrative burden of operating and scaling a highly available messaging cluster, while paying a low price for only what you use.

NSQ

NSQ

NSQ is a realtime distributed messaging platform designed to operate at scale, handling billions of messages per day. It promotes distributed and decentralized topologies without single points of failure, enabling fault tolerance and high availability coupled with a reliable message delivery guarantee. See features & guarantees.

SignalR

SignalR

SignalR allows bi-directional communication between server and client. Servers can now push content to connected clients instantly as it becomes available. SignalR supports Web Sockets, and falls back to other compatible techniques for older browsers. SignalR includes APIs for connection management (for instance, connect and disconnect events), grouping connections, and authorization.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase