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.
"The product is really good...One can get good performance because of kernel-based virtualization."
"Scaling the solution is easy. You just have to add more hardware."
"If you prefer command-line, there are all kinds of command-line options."
"It is an open ecosystem, and we see there is a benefit in open-source solutions."
"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."
"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."
"Our production servers are running in Linux, and this solution supports that environment well."
"A very reliable solution which can be used for x86 architecture virtualization with reasonable overhead."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution were the support and performance of the product and the flexibility it gives you to work."
"The cloning is a very useful tool."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that there is no cost because it is open source."
"The configuration and installation is pretty straightforward."
"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 snapshot feature is very powerful; it protects us from disaster."
"I like that Oracle VM is safe and stable. It is also very easy to administer. For example, opening a VM or adding a host adapter is extremely easy."
"Support for VF is needed, where you can, for example, export from VMware to KVM."
"In KVM, snapshots and cloning are areas where there could be a little more sophistication, like VMware."
"The only negative aspect of needing hardware support is a fully functional KVM can be dropped. It would be nice if the support for other platforms, like ARM or Risk, were as good as the x86 one. However, with the democratization of Chromebooks based on these chips and mobile devices, it will not take long for that to happen."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved and made more user-friendly."
"Technical support is not top-notch."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"The stability of this solution is less than other products in the same category."
"One problem I have is that it's not very scalable when it comes to resizing the VM disk dimensions. For example, if you have initially set a virtual drive to 10 GB and you want to upgrade it to 15 GB, it's not that easy."
"I think that this solution should be more user-friendly."
"There are a few bugs that need to be updated."
"One valuable feature would be for it to work right the first time but it doesn't necessarily do that."
"Oracle VMs don't have a solid web interface of their own. This is an area where Oracle is lagging behind. Now, we use headless servers, install Oracle VMs, and manage them remotely. We could use phpVirtual Box, but it is a third-party solution. A lot of people contribute to it, and it's not authenticated by Oracle. As a result, I don't find it to be a good option. Therefore, I would like to see Oracle offer an extension pack or a licensed version that fixes this problem."
"When I select the Ubuntu operating system from within the virtual machine, it sometimes hangs."
"The memory and hardware usage could be a little bit lighter. Right now, it's quite heavy on the usage. The CPU usage should be lower."
"The solution needs to improve the methods used for starting and stopping the machine."
"The communications setup lags. It does not connect properly so the batching and networking is a bit slow."
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.