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 most valuable feature is hypervisor. I can host at the same time different operating systems in Linux Windows."
"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."
"There is a strong emphasis on availability, and they have numerous API interfaces for distributed storage and the solution is quite known for its openness."
"I have found KVM to be scalable."
"A very reliable solution which can be used for x86 architecture virtualization with reasonable overhead."
"The initial setup was simple."
"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."
"Oracle VM VirtualBox is easy to use."
"The solution has high performance and is easy to use."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The cloning is a very useful tool."
"It is easy to use and does not require complex knowledge."
"The flexibility as well as performance wise and as well as data volume, we have huge volume stored."
"This product is extremely easy to install, use, has a great GUI and is incredibly stable."
"It is a stable product."
"I have encountered difficulties in getting the tool's documentation."
"Technical support is not top-notch."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"There are some issues with the graphics and some software that is very complex."
"The main drawback in the solution is probably disaster recovery."
"I have previously used VMware and KVM is easier to use. However, they both have their strengths depending on their use cases. They are mostly equal. One of VMware's advantages is it has better support."
"Support for VF is needed, where you can, for example, export from VMware to KVM."
"It should have the functionality where if I move the mouse away from one screen, the context changes automatically."
"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 AI and the UI could be improved. The user interface is a little outdated and the AI is not very attractive."
"Oracle’s support team should improve its response time."
"Basically, the GUI and command-line interface need improvement."
"There are a few bugs that need to be updated."
"The solution has to do a better job of promoting the product and its licensing capabilities."
KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 38 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.