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.
"What I like most about KVM is that it's very easy to use. Everything is built-in, even when writing command lines."
"I like that it's easy to manage. It's also more powerful when it comes to security than others. That point of view is the one consideration. The other consideration is that it's cost-effective."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"One of the best features of KVM is its user-friendly interface."
"If you prefer command-line, there are all kinds of command-line options."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of KVM is its stability."
"The most valuable feature is hypervisor. I can host at the same time different operating systems in Linux Windows."
"I like that it is free and runs on Linux/Ubuntu - I wouldn't use any other solution. I am able to perform small developing tests."
"The solution is very stable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that there is no cost because it is open source."
"This solution creates a snapshot of virtual machines so you can create test environments."
"This is a highly scalable solution."
"The installation is easy."
"The solution has high performance and is easy to use."
"The configuration and installation is pretty straightforward."
"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 main drawback in the solution is probably disaster recovery."
"I have encountered difficulties in getting the tool's documentation."
"I believe KVM offers a unified answer, while ProxMark addresses orchestration. KVM lacks orchestration. If the aim is to centrally oversee multiple KVMs – let's say to freeze them – a centralized management solution is absent."
"In KVM, snapshots and cloning are areas where there could be a little more sophistication, like VMware."
"Some things are pretty basic, and they could be more robust with more detail."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"The stability of this solution is less than other products in the same category."
"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 product lacks scalability since it is for desktops and not for servers."
"The AI and the UI could be improved. The user interface is a little outdated and the AI is not very attractive."
"One valuable feature would be for it to work right the first time but it doesn't necessarily do that."
"The solution should work to simplify the system. However, it should be flexible enough to allow for special cases."
"The solution lacks some open source remote administration tools. The reload of individual virtual machine definitions through the vboxweb service (via its API) without restarting it and the access to shared storage (to use teleport functions) need to be improved."
"This should have better support for multiple network cards and some parts of the GUI should be improved."
"The solution should have more enterprise features, like migration, high availability storage, disaster recovery, and the ability to deploy to enterprise-scale usage. They should not just offer desktop usage."
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.