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.
"Our production servers are running in Linux, and this solution supports that environment well."
"The KVM service is well managed with a central policy interface."
"It is an open ecosystem, and we see there is a benefit in open-source solutions."
"It offers a high-availability environment."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"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 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."
"Good screen and keyboard sharing feature."
"The scalability of the solution is very good."
"I like that it has a snapshot feature."
"The solution is very convenient and easy to use."
"The versatility, simplicity, and stability of the product are it's most valuable features."
"The cloning is a very useful tool."
"This product is very user-friendly and easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to copy bidirectionally between the desktop and the virtual machine."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"The product must provide better performance monitoring features."
"We are not getting good support from KVM, and it is not that user-friendly."
"The stability of this solution is less than other products in the same category."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"One thing that maybe could be improved is making it easier to scale. It needs to be more clear on how to scale the storage space for virtual machines."
"Its resource usage can be improved."
"The product lacks scalability since it is for desktops and not for servers."
"Basically, the GUI and command-line interface need improvement."
"It's not as robust as server platforms, nor does it need to be."
"We're working with them to be able to allow the local USB ports to be ported over to the remote desktop, running VirtualBox."
"There are a few bugs that need to be updated."
"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 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.