We performed a comparison between Citrix Hypervisor and RHEV based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Server Virtualization Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The onboarding process is pretty straightforward."
"The most valuable features are being able to host many virtual machines and being able to patch machines."
"What I find most valuable in Citrix Hypervisor is its licensing policy, because you'll get it for free if you buy a Citrix XenDesktop license. You don't need to spend additional money on the Citrix Hypervisor because you can manage both the Citrix XenDesktop and the Citrix Hypervisor with just one license, so you can save on cost. I also like that the solution is good support-wise. Hardware support is also faster compared to other solutions."
"Citrix is easy to use and is stable."
"We find there are good central maintenance and central management panels."
"The continued uptime of our virtual machines is good."
"It is quite flexible and rugged. It is also easy to understand and user-friendly. It is not as complicated as some of the other solutions. It has its technicalities, but it is easy to understand. You can easily pick up in a short period of time and understand how to manage the infrastructure."
"This is a dependable solution for virtualization with a good community for product support."
"It is very stable."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support portal."
"It is easy to deal with when comes to application migration and its compatibility with the multiple component applications."
"The price is the solution's most valuable aspect. It's much cheaper than, for example, VMware."
"Technically, the main reason why I'm using Red Hat is because of its stability."
"The solution makes migration easy."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is the popularity of the OS."
"I can control and manage everything. I know everything that's cooking inside. This is the best part for me."
"It can be useful to have a web management program because we have to install our client-server. We have to properly manage the host, if we had administration tools through a web interface it would be a benefit."
"We'd like them to add more automation to the product."
"It needs improvement with the security features."
"Citrix Hypervisor is expensive if you get it as a stand-alone product, so this is one area for improvement. Its price could be cheaper. We also found other areas for improvement in Citrix Hypervisor, for example, we can't use SCIM provisioning, and there are limitations to the size of the HDD. Another area for improvement is the pass-through storage, in particular the removable storage, because that also has limitations where you can't connect to the drive if it is more than one TB."
"Network management needs improvement because it is not very stable."
"I find that the features in Citrix Hypervisor are not as rich as with VMware. It would be a benefit if they had some of the other features VMware has, such as the ability to expand a drive on the fly. You do not have to take down the machine to do it but in Citrix you do."
"The solution would benefit from faster technical support."
"The interface has to be updated."
"Customers are not aware of this solution, they can improve by providing more awareness and solution availability."
"A few features of the product do not work as well as those in VMware."
"When we do a direct comparison, then obviously VMware does better in terms of having Fault Tolerance and doing active disaster recovery and these kind of things. This is something that can be improved within Red Hat."
"We hope that Red Hat can produce a paradigm edition. We are looking for paradigm computing and paradigm storage. Its scalability can be improved. It is not easy to scale, and we hope that Red Hat can provide a more scalable system. They should also provide local service and support. Our customers are looking for a good software vendor to provide professional services."
"With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected."
"The Administration of the Oracle database and the SAP ERP needs improvement."
"The UI should be more interactive with additional features."
"Specifically, enhancements in managing virtual machine migrations, cloning, and the creation of different VMs could further optimize its functionality."
Citrix Hypervisor is ranked 8th in Server Virtualization Software with 46 reviews while RHEV is ranked 10th in Server Virtualization Software with 33 reviews. Citrix Hypervisor is rated 8.2, while RHEV is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Citrix Hypervisor writes "Allows us to allocate CPU, memory, storage, and network resources across VMs and minimizes downtime in case of hardware failure or maintenance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RHEV writes "Offers frameworks with well-documented API and easy to use". Citrix Hypervisor is most compared with Proxmox VE, VMware vSphere, Hyper-V and KVM, whereas RHEV is most compared with VMware vSphere, KVM, Proxmox VE and Hyper-V. See our Citrix Hypervisor vs. RHEV report.
See our list of best Server Virtualization Software vendors.
We monitor all Server Virtualization Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
