We performed a comparison between KVM and Oracle VM VirtualBox based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Both KVM and Oracle VM VirtualBox have their strengths and weaknesses. Oracle VM VirtualBox seems to be the more favorable choice of the two, since it offers good scalability whereas scalability seems to be an ongoing issue for KVM users.
"If you are a Linux desktop user, KVM is the solution to go with if you have to start virtual machines with Linux or other operating systems with almost zero extra configuration needed."
"I think nine out of the ten supercomputers in the world use Linux KVM, so I think that attests to the fact that it is a scalable product."
"Very cost-effective."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"It offers a high-availability environment."
"The most helpful aspect of KVM is the fact that the interface is so minimal. It includes just what you need to set up the VMs and manage them, and it's very simple to do so."
"KVM has a rich options set which can be directly used or via wrappers, such as libvirt."
"The most valuable feature of KVM is its stability."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to copy bidirectionally between the desktop and the virtual machine."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its stability."
"The versatility, simplicity, and stability of the product are it's most valuable features."
"The product gives us the flexibility to try different machines."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"VirtualBox provides an isolated, consistent environment"
"The solution is very stable."
"The pause feature is valuable. I can pause, which is something that not all hypervisors allow. The snapshot feature is also valuable."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved and made more user-friendly."
"The KVM tech support is really bad. They are not very responsive."
"We would like to have a software lifecycle solution included in this solution. We can handle the software needed for KVM, but also the software that we provide. A lifecycle component would be very beneficial."
"KVM is very difficult to manage and run on daily operations."
"The solution should be more user friendly. We are struggling with the command lines."
"The initial setup of this solution is more difficult than some of the competing products and it could be improved."
"In our setup, we do not have any dashboards or orchestration, and it is hard to manage. We have 25 gig network cards, but the software driver we have only supported 10 gigs."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"The solution is not flexible."
"Oracle VM VirtualBox is not flexible, It's not like VMware."
"The solution needs to improve the methods used for starting and stopping the machine."
"The technical support needs to improve."
"We're working with them to be able to allow the local USB ports to be ported over to the remote desktop, running VirtualBox."
"The solution should work to simplify the system. However, it should be flexible enough to allow for special cases."
"This should have better support for multiple network cards and some parts of the GUI should be improved."
"The solution needs to improve its flexibility. It's not as flexible as VMware."
KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 39 reviews while Oracle VM VirtualBox is ranked 5th in Server Virtualization Software with 61 reviews. KVM is rated 8.0, while Oracle VM VirtualBox is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of KVM writes "Delivers good performance because of kernel-based virtualization". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle VM VirtualBox writes "The solution is versatile, simple to use, and stable". KVM is most compared with Proxmox VE, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere, VMware Workstation and Oracle VM, whereas Oracle VM VirtualBox is most compared with Proxmox VE, Hyper-V, Oracle VM, VMware Workstation and VMware vSphere. See our KVM vs. Oracle VM VirtualBox 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.