We performed a comparison between IBM PowerVM 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."The valuable feature of the solution is the technical aspects, focusing on elements like processor infinity."
"The most valuable feature of IBM PowerVM is the performance of the database workload."
"It is a stable solution with reliable performance."
"PowerVM is perhaps the only virtualization platform that offers 99.999% availability."
"The tool's performance is top-notch."
"What I like about this solution, is that it is easy to configure."
"The product never fails to work and is very stable in general. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"A valuable feature of PowerVM is a feature that is used for higher availability plus stream for posting, which is very useful. There's a flash copy feature which we are using. PowerVM itself, I know, helps us to control and manage our Oracle licensing compliance, since it is our hardware partitioning. This is very important. If you use VMware, there will be a licensing issue. This PowerVM is a hardware partitioner, which is very important for license compliance. We are happy with this solution."
"Good screen and keyboard sharing feature."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"The tool's most valuable feature is backup. The product makes it easy to manage virtual machines. Other tools require third-party applications like VMware and vSphere. However, KVM doesn't require these applications."
"It is easy to use, stable, and flexible. It is a pretty mature product, and it is faster than VirtualBox."
"I like that this is an open-source solution. It is very powerful, and it's easy."
"I find the density of the product most valuable. It is density that a technologist can just assign page merging. This is what makes KVM one of the important players of the virtualization market."
"KVM has a rich options set which can be directly used or via wrappers, such as libvirt."
"The key aspect is that the KVM directly interacts with the Kronos. There's no clear indication of indirect communication with Kronos. It is not linked to Kronos, and interaction is straightforward without any intermediaries."
"A GUI version of VIOS would be a great plus for people moving from Intel-based hypervisors."
"The solution's interface needs to be integrated with messaging analysis."
"SRM for site recovery is a feature that should be included."
"The licensing could be better."
"The cost of this solution is high."
"This solution is lacking the ability to have servers act as a cluster, such as in VMware. IBM has come out with a feature similar to VMware's vCenter but it is not as mature. They need to add LPM shared-nothing feature, such as in vMotion."
"To make it a ten, I would like for them to add automation and configuration tools in order to help use the manager."
"As understand it, IBM sells all its hardware to Lenovo, and only PCs servers are managed by IBM. It's uncertain how much longer IBM will continue in this way, especially with the current trend of transitioning from on-premises to cloud and hybrid models. The market is evolving. Given this market shift, it's essential to identify areas for improvement. IBM has introduced the PowerVM Series, including Linux, which is a positive step. However, customers are already moving towards x86 servers due to cost considerations. The cost of PowerVM compared to x86 servers appears to be a significant factor."
"The KVM tech support is really bad. They are not very responsive."
"I have encountered difficulties in getting the tool's documentation."
"The main drawback in the solution is probably disaster recovery."
"The grid interface of KVM needs improvement. It could be more beautiful, especially when compared to VMware."
"Some things are pretty basic, and they could be more robust with more detail."
"We still occasionally build Interlaced Wireless Protection within our environment. The ecosystem entails areas, where we support agents, and release backup and security solutions. Collaboration with independent software vendors (ITOLs or ITOLED) is necessary to offer these solutions to customers. However, the scope of the ecosystem in KVM is not as extensive as that of VMware's. In contrast, VMware boasts a robust partner network, allowing for comprehensive customer solutions. On the other hand, KVM’s ecosystem is comparatively limited in comparison. I would like to see FT features in KVM."
"We are not getting good support from KVM, and it is not that user-friendly."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
IBM PowerVM is ranked 9th in Server Virtualization Software with 28 reviews while KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 39 reviews. IBM PowerVM is rated 8.4, while KVM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM PowerVM writes "A stable system for high-end data processing with a great support structure". On the other hand, the top reviewer of KVM writes "Delivers good performance because of kernel-based virtualization". IBM PowerVM is most compared with VMware vSphere, Hyper-V, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), Proxmox VE and Oracle VM VirtualBox, whereas KVM is most compared with Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI). See our IBM PowerVM 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.