We performed a comparison between Citrix Hypervisor and KVM 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."We can easily migrate VMs from one host to another."
"What I like the most is the support of the GPU Graphics and the VM Live migration."
"Citrix Hypervisor integrates easily and I can manage the infrastructure better. If I need to take a machine down to expand the hard drive, I do not have to physically be here. I do not need to order new equipment or new hard drives. I can shut it down, increase the drive space and bring it back up."
"This is a dependable solution for virtualization with a good community for product support."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The most valuable features are being able to host many virtual machines and being able to patch machines."
"The solution's security is its most valuable aspect."
"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."
"The initial setup was simple."
"One of the best features of KVM is its user-friendly interface."
"If you prefer command-line, there are all kinds of command-line options."
"The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before."
"KVM is stable."
"It is an open ecosystem, and we see there is a benefit in open-source solutions."
"A very reliable solution which can be used for x86 architecture virtualization with reasonable overhead."
"KVM has a rich options set which can be directly used or via wrappers, such as libvirt."
"The self-service user portal needs to be more granular and be more customizable."
"Integration with other vendors and other applications could be improved."
"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."
"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 needs better backup facilities that are available for virtual machines to create servers on."
"Citrix is not investing in the virtual surroundings."
"Network management needs improvement because it is not very stable."
"Overall, I can't think of a feature that is lacking. We've been pretty satisfied overall."
"I have encountered difficulties in getting the tool's documentation."
"The stability of this solution is less than other products in the same category."
"There are some issues with the graphics and some software that is very complex."
"Technical support could be better. In the next release, I would like to see an improved user interface and dashboard. This type of improvement will make it easy or help our engineers understand the solution from a requirement point of view."
"In KVM, snapshots and cloning are areas where there could be a little more sophistication, like VMware."
"KVM is very difficult to manage and run on daily operations."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"I believe KVM offers a unified answer, while ProxMark addresses orchestration. KVM lacks orchestration. If the aim is to centrally oversee multiple KVMs – let's say to freeze them – a centralized management solution is absent."
Citrix Hypervisor is ranked 8th in Server Virtualization Software with 46 reviews while KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 39 reviews. Citrix Hypervisor is rated 8.2, while KVM is rated 8.0. 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 KVM writes "Delivers good performance because of kernel-based virtualization". Citrix Hypervisor is most compared with Proxmox VE, VMware vSphere, Hyper-V, Oracle VM VirtualBox and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas KVM is most compared with Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere and IBM PowerVM. See our Citrix Hypervisor vs. KVM 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.