FoundryNet / Compare
Protocol comparison

Protocol comparisons

Written by the layer that has to parse both sides into one schema. Every comparison ends the same way: the protocol choice stops mattering once the output is canonical, but the reasons to pick one differ, and they are real.


ComparisonWhy people ask
Modbus TCP vs OPC UAThe default retrofit question. You have a plant of Modbus devices, a new machine arrives speaking OPC UA, and someone has to decide what the site standard is.
Modbus TCP vs MQTT / Sparkplug BThe question behind every gateway purchase: should the device be polled, or should it publish?
MTConnect vs OPC UAThe machine-tool standards question. Both claim the shop floor, and several controllers now expose both simultaneously.
BACnet/IP vs Modbus TCPThe question that appears the first time a data centre or a factory tries to put building systems and process equipment on one dashboard.
Modbus RTU vs Modbus TCPNot really a protocol choice, a wiring choice. Same data model, same registers, entirely different operational life.
MQTT / Sparkplug B vs OPC UAThe architecture question for a greenfield IIoT build: broker in the middle, or client-server to each asset?
PROFINET / S7 vs EtherNet/IPThe one that is really a question about which controller vendor you already own.
SunSpec vs Modbus TCPThe solar and storage question. SunSpec is not an alternative to Modbus, it runs on top of it, but the choice of whether to implement it is real.
DNP3 vs Modbus TCPThe utility SCADA question, and the one place where Modbus's simplicity is genuinely a liability.
J1939 (CAN) vs OPC UAThe mixed-fleet question: a company that runs both vehicles and a plant, and wants one data layer over both.
For platforms Both protocols. One engine. License it. You should not have to pick. Embed the engine that normalizes both into one canonical schema and ship it as a native feature. Platform licensing →
Get the thesis behind this infrastructure: The Machine Agent, weekly.