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.
"KVM is stable."
"The tool's most valuable feature is backup. The product makes it easy to manage virtual machines. Other tools require third-party applications like VMware and vSphere. However, KVM doesn't require these applications."
"I appreciate the network passcode feature in KVM, as it provides a convenient way to manage DNS and cloud hosting."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"Our production servers are running in Linux, and this solution supports that environment well."
"The product is really good...One can get good performance because of kernel-based virtualization."
"The initial setup was simple."
"It offers a high-availability environment."
"Technically, the main reason why I'm using Red Hat is because of its stability."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The price is the solution's most valuable aspect. It's much cheaper than, for example, VMware."
"The solution makes migration easy."
"This solution is very stable. Much more so than similar products."
"It's a scalable solution."
"It is easy to deal with when comes to application migration and its compatibility with the multiple component applications."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward and well-documented. The process is very similar to its competitors. The success of your setup depends on how well you plan."
"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."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"The product must provide better performance monitoring features."
"Some things are pretty basic, and they could be more robust with more detail."
"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 stability of this solution is less than other products in the same category."
"We are not getting good support from KVM, and it is not that user-friendly."
"Configuring the network interfaces is much better in Ubuntu and should be improved."
"Red Hat by itself is not scalable. But you can have third party add-ons like Ceph to make it massively scalable."
"The UI should be more interactive with additional features."
"The Administration of the Oracle database and the SAP ERP needs improvement."
"There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference."
"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 documentation is not as good as it should be."
"I heard that there are big differences between Red Hat eight and seven, but it's still quite difficult for me to judge it. I found it a bit more difficult to manage than version seven, which was much easier. In term of features, though, it is still not yet clear which is better. I have no clear idea of which features need to be changed at the moment."
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.