KOBAI VS. TIGERGRAPH

When evaluating graph capabilities, the choice extends beyond technology features. It's an architectural decision between adopting dedicated graph infrastructure or embedding semantic intelligence within your existing lakehouse platform.

 

The Architectural Choice

 

This comparison clarifies two fundamentally different approaches to enterprise graph capabilities:

 

TigerGraph is optimized for graph-native computation at scale. Kobai is optimized for semantic coherence within lakehouse architecture.

 

Architecture: Dedicated Infrastructure vs Lakehouse Integration

TigerGraph: High-Performance Graph Database

TigerGraph delivers graph analytics through dedicated database infrastructure:

• Native graph storage optimized for property graph models and traversal patterns.

• GSQL query language designed for graph computation and pattern matching.

• Distributed architecture for parallel graph processing across clusters.

• Data loading from external sources (Spark DataFrames, data lakes, streaming sources) into TigerGraph storage.

• Savanna cloud platform with compute-storage separation for elastic scaling.

This architecture delivers graph computation power for organizations requiring dedicated graph database capabilities and willing to operate specialized graph infrastructure.

 

Kobai: Lakehouse-Native Semantic Layer

 

Kobai embeds semantic intelligence directly into the Databricks lakehouse without introducing separate graph infrastructure:

• Semantic queries translate into optimized SQL/Spark and execute on Databricks compute.

• Data remains in Delta Lake; Saturn creates semantic index referencing underlying tables.

• Zero data movement. Graph traversals happen where data already lives.

• Unity Catalog permissions extend to semantic operations - governance inheritance, not parallel configuration.

• Built on Databricks infrastructure. No additional clusters, storage, or graph-specific operational overhead.

Why This Matters: TigerGraph delivers powerful graph database capabilities for organizations that need dedicated graph infrastructure. However, for enterprises standardizing on Databricks as their strategic data platform, this introduces a second data system to manage, load, synchronize, and govern. Kobai eliminates this architectural split by making semantic intelligence native to the lakehouse, reducing platform complexity and operational dependencies.

 

Data Pattern: Copy-and-Compute vs In-Place Intelligence

 

TigerGraph: Load Data into Graph Storage

 

TigerGraph's documented data loading patterns involve moving data into the graph database:

• Spark connector: Reads from Spark DataFrames and data lakes, writes into TigerGraph storage.

• Kafka loading: Ingests streaming data into TigerGraph for real-time graph updates.

• ETL pipelines: Extract from lakehouse/warehouse, transform to graph model, load into TigerGraph.

• Graph storage: TigerGraph maintains its own data storage separate from source systems.

This pattern enables TigerGraph to optimize storage and computation for graph workloads but requires data replication and ongoing synchronization between lakehouse and graph database.

 

Kobai: Query Data Where It Lives

 

Kobai queries lakehouse data in place without replication:

• Semantic index: Saturn maintains lightweight semantic metadata referencing Delta Lake tables.

• Query translation: Graph patterns translate to SQL/Spark queries executed against source tables.

• No data movement: Data never leaves Delta Lake. No ETL, no sync, no storage duplication.

• Single source of truth: Lakehouse remains authoritative; semantic layer adds intelligence without creating copies.

Why This Matters: Data replication introduces operational complexity, synchronization latency, and storage costs. Organizations maintaining both a lakehouse and a graph database must manage data freshness, resolve conflicts, and operate dual storage systems. Kobai's in-place query pattern eliminates these concerns by keeping data in one place while providing semantic intelligence over it.

 

Governance: Parallel Systems vs Unified Model

 

TigerGraph: Graph Database Governance

 

TigerGraph provides security and governance within its platform:

• RBAC model: Role-based access control configured within TigerGraph.

• Authentication: LDAP integration and SAML-based SSO support.

• Access controls: Permissions managed separately from source system governance.

• Audit capability: TigerGraph audit logs for graph database operations.

This requires organizations to maintain security configurations in both the lakehouse and the graph database, with manual synchronization when permissions change.

 

Kobai: Governance Inheritance

 

Kobai extends existing lakehouse governance rather than replicating it:

• Unity Catalog extension: Semantic queries automatically respect Unity Catalog permissions on underlying tables.

• Inherited controls: Row-level, column-level, and table-level security flow through to semantic operations.

• Unified audit trail: Semantic queries appear in lakehouse audit logs alongside other data access.

• Lineage integration: Semantic models and queries become part of lakehouse data lineage.

• Single governance model: No parallel security configuration or permission synchronization.

Why This Matters: Governance complexity grows when security policies live in multiple systems. Changes to user permissions, data classifications, or compliance rules must be synchronized manually across platforms. Kobai inherits lakehouse governance automatically when Unity Catalog permissions change, semantic operations reflect those changes immediately without additional configuration.

 

Accessibility: Technical Specialists vs Business Users

 

TigerGraph: Graph Database Expertise Required

 

TigerGraph provides sophisticated capabilities for technical teams:

• GSQL query language: Powerful but requires graph query expertise.

• Graph modeling: Property graph schema design benefits from specialized knowledge.

• GraphStudio: Visual development environment for graph developers.

• Target users: Data engineers and graph specialists building analytical solutions.

This is appropriate when graph analytics is primarily a technical engineering function rather than a business-user capability.

 

Kobai: Domain-Expert Accessibility

 

Kobai is designed for business users and domain experts, not just technical specialists:

• No-code semantic modeling: Studio enables business users to define ontologies visually without graph database expertise.

• Persona-driven exploration: Tower provides tailored views for different business roles without query language requirements.

• Automated mapping: Precursor connects source data to semantic models with guided workflows.

• Natural language queries: Episteme allows questions in business language, not technical query syntax.

• Target users: Supply chain analysts, R&D scientists, compliance officers - domain experts who understand business context.

Why This Matters: Graph capabilities deliver business value when the people who understand the domain can use them directly. If semantic intelligence requires data engineers to translate every business question into GSQL, adoption remains limited to technical teams. Kobai democratizes semantic intelligence where domain experts model and explore knowledge themselves without waiting on specialized engineering resources.

 

Strategic Fit: Graph Operations vs Lakehouse Intelligence

 

The architectural choice between TigerGraph and Kobai reflects different enterprise data strategies.

 

TigerGraph: Graph-First Architecture

 

TigerGraph serves organizations where graph computation is central:

• Graph database as system of record for relationship-intensive operational workloads.

• Performance-critical graph traversals requiring dedicated graph compute infrastructure.

• Organizations willing to invest in specialized graph database operations and expertise.

• Graph analytics as distinct architectural tier alongside data warehouse/lakehouse.

 

Kobai: Lakehouse-First Architecture

 

Kobai serves organizations pursuing lakehouse consolidation:

• Databricks as strategic data platform with semantic intelligence as natural extension.

• Semantic understanding enabling better analytics, AI, and decision-making across domains.

• Organizations seeking to minimize platform sprawl and operational complexity.

• Knowledge layer that democratizes semantic intelligence to business users, not just technical specialists.

Strategic Implication: TigerGraph and Kobai solve for different architectural philosophies. TigerGraph says, 'Graph workloads deserve dedicated infrastructure.' Kobai says, 'Semantic intelligence should be lakehouse-native.' Neither is universally right, the choice depends on whether your enterprise strategy is multi-platform specialization or lakehouse consolidation.

 

When to Choose Kobai Over TigerGraph

 

Kobai is the right architectural choice when:

• Databricks is your strategic platform: Your enterprise has standardized on Databricks and seeks to minimize additional infrastructure.

• Data movement is a concern: Zero data replication and single source of truth are architectural requirements.

• Governance consolidation matters: Unity Catalog is your governance foundation and semantic operations must inherit controls automatically.

• Business user adoption is critical: Domain experts need semantic capabilities without learning graph query languages.

• Operational simplicity is a priority: You want to extend your lakehouse, not manage a separate graph database platform.

 

When Dedicated Graph Infrastructure Makes Sense

 

A dedicated graph database architecture may be appropriate when:

• Graph as operational store: The graph database itself serves as the authoritative system of record for relationship data.

• Extreme performance requirements: Workloads require millisecond-latency graph traversals at massive scale with dedicated graph compute.

• Graph-native development model: Teams have deep GSQL expertise and graph-first architectural patterns.

• Willingness to manage graph infrastructure: Organization can dedicate resources to operating specialized graph database clusters.

Kobai is optimized for a different pattern: semantic intelligence as lakehouse infrastructure, not graph computation as a separate operational tier. The choice depends on whether your priority is graph database capabilities or semantic understanding integrated with your data platform.

 

Platform Strategy: Specialization vs Consolidation

 

Enterprise architecture decisions create operational patterns that persist for years. The graph infrastructure choice shapes how complexity scales as semantic initiatives expand.

Consider: As your semantic workloads grow, does operational complexity concentrate in your lakehouse platform or distribute across the lakehouse plus graph database?

Many enterprises pursuing modern data strategies seek to reduce the number of specialized platforms they operate. This consolidation reduces integration complexity, simplifies governance, and improves operational efficiency.

Strategic Alignment: Kobai aligns with lakehouse consolidation trends. As Databricks investment grows (more data, more users, more AI workflows), Kobai's semantic intelligence becomes more deeply integrated, not more operationally complex. This architectural fit matters for long-term platform ROI and organizational agility.

 

Architectural Comparison

 

The Architectural Decision

 

Both TigerGraph and Kobai deliver graph-based intelligence to enterprises. The fundamental difference is architectural philosophy: dedicated graph infrastructure vs lakehouse-integrated semantics.

TigerGraph provides high-performance graph database capabilities for organizations willing to operate specialized graph infrastructure. Kobai provides semantic intelligence as a natural extension of lakehouse architecture for organizations pursuing platform consolidation.

Neither is universally better. The right choice depends on your enterprise data strategy: whether you view graph capabilities as requiring dedicated infrastructure, or as semantic intelligence that should be lakehouse-native.

Semantic intelligence without separate infrastructure.Business accessibility without technical barriers.Governance through extension, not replication.

 

See how Kobai embeds semantic intelligence in your Databricks lakehouse

See Kobai Inside Databricks | Explore Customer Usecases