We performed a comparison between KVM and RHEV based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: KVM wins out in this comparison. Users find it very fast and super easy to use and manage. It provides excellent security and scales easily. Many users feel RHEV is lacking in some documentation capabilities and security features and that it can be challenging to scale up when needed.
"I have found KVM to be scalable."
"KVM is stable."
"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."
"The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before."
"The product is really good...One can get good performance because of kernel-based virtualization."
"The initial setup was simple."
"One of the best features of KVM is its user-friendly interface."
"Very cost-effective."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support portal."
"What they provide is way beyond the essential requirements of customers."
"The most valuable features of RHEV are all the tools, such as virtualization, management of cloud platforms, and integration of container environments. The solution has good compatibility between virtualization, content management, and cloud management. Having the full set of these tools is the advantage of it."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is the popularity of the OS."
"The solution has a good licensing module."
"RHEV’s cost is much less compared to VMware."
"It is a scalable solution."
"It's a scalable solution."
"The product must provide better performance monitoring features."
"The networking with wireless devices needs improvement."
"Business continuity features need to be added."
"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 grid interface of KVM needs improvement. It could be more beautiful, especially when compared to VMware."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"In KVM, snapshots and cloning are areas where there could be a little more sophistication, like VMware."
"I would like to see more focus on microservices and integration with Kubernetes or OpenShift."
"It would be better to have more patches, especially kernel-level updates, live and online so that we can keep the business up and running during this period."
"Customers are not aware of this solution, they can improve by providing more awareness and solution availability."
"In comparison to VMware, this solution isn't as stable. We're testing it right now, and we're not trusting the stability of the product."
"We hope that Red Hat can produce a paradigm edition. We are looking for paradigm computing and paradigm storage. Its scalability can be improved. It is not easy to scale, and we hope that Red Hat can provide a more scalable system. They should also provide local service and support. Our customers are looking for a good software vendor to provide professional services."
"The biggest improvement would be more third-party direct support for things like backups and provisioning through third-party portals."
"It lags behind in that you need to go to something like Fedora to get all the extra bells and whistles."
"RHEV can improve by keeping pace with new features and new enhancements. They should not be halted or delayed innovation because over the past quarter the enhancements have not been as fast as they have been previously."
"The availability of technical expertise with the solution may be limited in some areas."
KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 39 reviews while RHEV is ranked 10th in Server Virtualization Software with 32 reviews. KVM is rated 8.0, while RHEV is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of KVM writes "Delivers good performance because of kernel-based virtualization". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RHEV writes "Offers frameworks with well-documented API and easy to use". KVM is most compared with Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere and Citrix Hypervisor, whereas RHEV is most compared with VMware vSphere, Proxmox VE, Hyper-V, Oracle VM and Nutanix AHV Virtualization. See our KVM vs. RHEV 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.