We performed a comparison between Nutanix AHV Virtualization 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 most valuable feature of Nutanix AHV is that it can be managed through Hyper-V, which is Microsoft's hypervisor, VMware, and Citrix XenServer."
"The solution scales very well."
"The most valuable feature of Nutanix AHV is the prism, it is a beneficial central management console."
"Using AHV, we have a built-in VR solution. It operates using a reduplication-based unique package transfer process."
"It is a stable solution. I haven't faced stability issues in the solution."
"Nutanix AHV Virtualization has good performance and can be used for backup and disaster."
"The storage features and volume system are great."
"The most valuable feature of Nutanix AHV Virtualization is the user-friendly environment. The integration, implementation, and training for the solution are good."
"There aren't any bugs on the solution."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"It is easy to deal with when comes to application migration and its compatibility with the multiple component applications."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is the popularity of the OS."
"We find the ease of use of this solution to be invaluable. It is user-friendly and integrates well with other software."
"I can control and manage everything. I know everything that's cooking inside. This is the best part for me."
"Stability and speed are the most valuable aspects."
"It's a scalable solution."
"If you have the need for special hardware like FibreChannel-Cards or such and there is no networked-way around it (such as you could work with USB Dongles via an HW-Dongle-Server of network), you have to use a separate hypervisor."
"I haven't come across any limitations. Nutanix doesn't support externally attached storage through Fibre Channel. However, Nutanix doesn't support Fibre Channel connectivity. This, in my opinion, is a weakness of Nutanix. For instance, it does not support Cyber Talent. To clarify, you cannot connect external Fibre Channel storage or NAS storage resources with Nutanix. However, VMware vSAN supports such solutions."
"An improvement would be for Nutanix AHV to support VMDK, AOS, Hyper-V, and VMware."
"The licensing costs are a little bit expensive."
"My storage use is doubled; if I am creating a one TB virtual machine then my storage policy will take two TB from my cluster."
"The solution should work to improve its stability."
"The solution's pricing could be improved."
"Some companies do not support AHV."
"In comparison to VMware, this solution isn't as stable. We're testing it right now, and we're not trusting the stability of the product."
"Specifically, enhancements in managing virtual machine migrations, cloning, and the creation of different VMs could further optimize its functionality."
"Configuring the network interfaces is much better in Ubuntu and should be improved."
"Red Hat by itself is not scalable. But you can have third party add-ons like Ceph to make it massively scalable."
"RHEV can improve by keeping pace with new features and new enhancements. They should not be halted or delayed innovation because over the past quarter the enhancements have not been as fast as they have been previously."
"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."
"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 would like the dashboard feature of this solution to be improved, as it is not very detailed at present."
Nutanix AHV Virtualization is ranked 6th in Server Virtualization Software with 48 reviews while RHEV is ranked 10th in Server Virtualization Software with 33 reviews. Nutanix AHV Virtualization is rated 8.6, while RHEV is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Nutanix AHV Virtualization writes "Lightweight, integrates well, and the technical support is responsive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RHEV writes "Offers frameworks with well-documented API and easy to use". Nutanix AHV Virtualization is most compared with Proxmox VE, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere, KVM and Oracle VM VirtualBox, whereas RHEV is most compared with VMware vSphere, KVM, Proxmox VE, Hyper-V and Oracle VM VirtualBox. See our Nutanix AHV Virtualization 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.
