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.
"One of the best features of KVM is its user-friendly interface."
"Documentation and problem-solving troubleshooting are the most valuable features. Performance (when fine-tuned and with "special" HW) is awesome, equal to or more than other enterprise closed-source solutions."
"Very cost-effective."
"The KVM service is well managed with a central policy interface."
"Scaling the solution is easy. You just have to add more hardware."
"Good screen and keyboard sharing feature."
"It is easy to use, stable, and flexible. It is a pretty mature product, and it is faster than VirtualBox."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"Oracle VM VirtualBox is easy to use."
"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 convenient and easy to use."
"The solution has high performance and is easy to use."
"I like that it has a snapshot feature."
"The flexibility and the closed platform, so it allows you to run in multiple platforms, Windows, Linux, Macintosh."
"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."
"The product’s most valuable feature is the ability to manage multiple operating systems through one application."
"I would like to see more focus on microservices and integration with Kubernetes or OpenShift."
"Some things are pretty basic, and they could be more robust with more detail."
"We are not getting good support from KVM, and it is not that user-friendly."
"Its resource usage can be improved."
"The KVM tech support is really bad. They are not very responsive."
"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."
"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."
"The stability of this solution is less than other products in the same category."
"The communications setup lags. It does not connect properly so the batching and networking is a bit slow."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"This solution needs improvement with the business continuity planning, disaster and recovery management and using centralized data storage."
"The installation is difficult and could be improved."
"They could improve the graphics functionality of the product."
"The solution needs to improve the methods used for starting and stopping the machine."
"Basically, the GUI and command-line interface need improvement."
"It's not as robust as server platforms, nor does it need to be."
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.