Softwr

Machine Learning · head to head

Amazon Redshift ML vs Apache Spark MLlib

Amazon Redshift ML logo

Amazon Redshift ML

Machine Learning

SQL statements in Redshift that train models on SageMaker and return them as functions

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Apache Spark MLlib logo

Apache Spark MLlib

Machine Learning

The machine learning library inside Apache Spark, for data that will not fit on one machine

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Amazon Redshift ML training is billed by SageMaker separately from Redshift, so a feature that looks like a free SQL statement produces a second line item on a different part of the bill that the analyst who ran it usually cannot see.; Apache Spark MLlib the algorithm set has grown slowly and its gradient boosting does not match XGBoost or LightGBM in accuracy or speed, so teams routinely do feature engineering in Spark and then train elsewhere, which undoes the argument for using it at all.
  • They diverge on capability: Amazon Redshift ML covers CREATE MODEL in SQL, Apache Spark MLlib covers DataFrame-based pipelines.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Amazon Redshift ML and Apache Spark MLlib actually diverge.

Attributes where Amazon Redshift ML and Apache Spark MLlib differ
AttributeAmazon Redshift MLApache Spark MLlib
Pricing modelusage-basedopen-source
PlatformsWebLinux, macOS, Windows
Founded20061999

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Machine Learning).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Amazon Redshift ML

  • CREATE MODEL in SQL
  • Automatic model selection
  • Local inference
  • Bring your own model
  • Algorithm selection
  • Cost ceiling controls
  • Existing warehouse security
  • Batch and interactive scoring

Only in Apache Spark MLlib

  • DataFrame-based pipelines
  • Distributed algorithms
  • Alternating least squares
  • Feature transformers
  • Model selection
  • Pipeline persistence
  • Language bindings
  • Runs in existing Spark deployments

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Amazon Redshift ML

  • Adding a churn or propensity score to an existing dashboard where the data is already in Redshift and nobody needs a bespoke modelnot Apache Spark MLlib
  • Letting an analytics team test whether a predictive column has any business value before asking for data science headcountnot Apache Spark MLlib
  • Scoring rows inside a SQL pipeline where moving data out to a separate service would add fragility for little benefitnot Apache Spark MLlib
  • Organisations committed to AWS whose main constraint is a data science backlog rather than modelling sophisticationnot Apache Spark MLlib

Apache Spark MLlib

  • Training on a data set too large to hold on one machine, where sampling down would lose the rare events you care aboutnot Amazon Redshift ML
  • Feature engineering and model fitting in one job over tables already in the lake, avoiding an extract and a second copy of sensitive datanot Amazon Redshift ML
  • Batch scoring of hundreds of millions of rows on a schedule, where throughput matters and per-request latency does notnot Amazon Redshift ML
  • Organisations that already run and pay for Spark, where adding a modelling step is cheaper than introducing a second platformnot Amazon Redshift ML

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Amazon Redshift ML

  • Training is billed by SageMaker separately from Redshift, so a feature that looks like a free SQL statement produces a second line item on a different part of the bill that the analyst who ran it usually cannot see.
  • Autopilot searches many candidate models by default and the duration and cost of CREATE MODEL scale with the data size and the MAX_CELLS setting, so an unconstrained statement against a large table is an expensive accident rather than an experiment.
  • Local inference runs on the Redshift cluster itself, so scoring millions of rows competes for the resources the warehouse exists to provide, and the remote inference alternative adds a per-batch network call plus an hourly SageMaker endpoint charge that persists whether or not anyone queries it.
  • The supported problem types are limited to what the exposed algorithms cover, so anything involving text, images, sequences, a custom loss function or a bespoke evaluation metric is out of scope and has to be built conventionally.
  • There is no retraining schedule, drift detection or model registry, so a model created by a statement stays exactly as trained until somebody remembers to recreate it, and nothing in the warehouse will report that its accuracy has decayed.

Apache Spark MLlib

  • The algorithm set has grown slowly and its gradient boosting does not match XGBoost or LightGBM in accuracy or speed, so teams routinely do feature engineering in Spark and then train elsewhere, which undoes the argument for using it at all.
  • There is no deep learning in MLlib; neural network work on Spark requires a separate integration, and the DataFrame-centred interface is an awkward fit for it.
  • Fitted models serialise into Spark's own format, so low-latency serving needs either a Spark session in the request path, which is far too slow, or a conversion through ONNX or MLeap, and this is where most Spark ML projects stall.
  • Debugging is JVM cluster debugging: executor out-of-memory, shuffle spill, skewed partitions and serialisation failures, so an engineer without Spark operations experience spends more time tuning the cluster than improving the model.
  • The cluster is the real cost and Spark holds executors for the duration of a job, so a badly partitioned training run pays for idle cores across the whole fleet while one straggler task finishes.

Pricing, plan by plan

Amazon Redshift ML

Free
  • Free TrialFree
    • 2-month trial
    • 750 DC2.Large hours
  • On-Demand$0.25/hour
    • Per-node pricing
    • SageMaker training

Apache Spark MLlib

Free

No published plan breakdown. See the Apache Spark MLlib review.

Which should you pick?

Choose Amazon Redshift ML if

  • You need create model in sql.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You also want automatic model selection.
Amazon Redshift ML review

Choose Apache Spark MLlib if

  • You need dataframe-based pipelines.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows.
  • You also want distributed algorithms.
Apache Spark MLlib review

Questions people ask

Is Amazon Redshift ML or Apache Spark MLlib better?
Neither clearly leads. Amazon Redshift ML starts at Free and Apache Spark MLlib at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Amazon Redshift ML or Apache Spark MLlib?
Amazon Redshift ML starts at Free and Apache Spark MLlib at Free.
Does Amazon Redshift ML or Apache Spark MLlib run on more platforms?
Amazon Redshift ML runs on Web. Apache Spark MLlib runs on Linux, macOS, Windows.
Can I use Amazon Redshift ML for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Amazon Redshift ML best used for?
Amazon Redshift ML is most often used for adding a churn or propensity score to an existing dashboard where the data is already in redshift and nobody needs a bespoke model, letting an analytics team test whether a predictive column has any business value before asking for data science headcount, scoring rows inside a sql pipeline where moving data out to a separate service would add fragility for little benefit, organisations committed to aws whose main constraint is a data science backlog rather than modelling sophistication. Of those, adding a churn or propensity score to an existing dashboard where the data is already in redshift and nobody needs a bespoke model and letting an analytics team test whether a predictive column has any business value before asking for data science headcount are not what Apache Spark MLlib is typically brought in for.
What can Amazon Redshift ML do that Apache Spark MLlib cannot?
Amazon Redshift ML covers CREATE MODEL in SQL, Automatic model selection, Local inference, Bring your own model. Apache Spark MLlib covers DataFrame-based pipelines, Distributed algorithms, Alternating least squares, Feature transformers.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Amazon Redshift ML: Does it require SageMaker?

Yes. Redshift ML is an interface; the training happens in SageMaker and needs an IAM role and an S3 bucket for the intermediate data.

Apache Spark MLlib: What is the difference between spark.ml and spark.mllib?

spark.ml is the DataFrame-based interface and the one to use. spark.mllib is the older RDD-based package, kept for compatibility, in maintenance and receiving no new features.

Amazon Redshift ML: Is there an extra charge?

The SQL interface is part of Redshift, but the training runs as a SageMaker job charged at SageMaker rates, and a remote inference endpoint is billed for as long as it exists.

Apache Spark MLlib: Do I need a cluster?

Spark runs in local mode on one machine, which is useful for development, but if you are running on one machine you would generally be better served by scikit-learn or XGBoost, which are faster and more capable at that scale.

Amazon Redshift ML: What kinds of model can it build?

Regression, binary and multiclass classification through the automatic path, plus direct use of XGBoost, linear learner, multilayer perceptron and K-means. Anything beyond structured tabular prediction is out of scope.

Apache Spark MLlib: Can I use scikit-learn on Spark instead?

Yes, and it is often the better answer. You can distribute independent model fits across the cluster, or use pandas user-defined functions to run per-group models, keeping Spark for the data and a mature library for the modelling.

Amazon Redshift ML: Can I use a model I trained myself?

Yes, through the bring-your-own-model path, either compiled into the cluster for local inference or called as a remote SageMaker endpoint.

Apache Spark MLlib: How do I serve an MLlib model in real time?

Not directly. Either convert the pipeline to a portable format such as ONNX or MLeap, or reimplement the scoring path. Starting a Spark session per request adds seconds of overhead and is not a serving strategy.

Amazon Redshift ML: Does it retrain automatically?

No. Retraining means running CREATE MODEL again, on a schedule you build yourself, and nothing in the product monitors whether it is needed.

Apache Spark MLlib: Is it free?

The library is Apache 2.0 and costs nothing. The cluster it runs on is billed by your cloud provider or by Databricks, and that is the actual expense.

Share

Related pages

More on Amazon Redshift ML

More on Apache Spark MLlib

Keep looking

Other head to heads