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.
"A very reliable solution which can be used for x86 architecture virtualization with reasonable overhead."
"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."
"If you prefer command-line, there are all kinds of command-line options."
"I have found KVM to be scalable."
"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."
"The key aspect is that the KVM directly interacts with the Kronos. There's no clear indication of indirect communication with Kronos. It is not linked to Kronos, and interaction is straightforward without any intermediaries."
"The product is really good...One can get good performance because of kernel-based virtualization."
"Technically, the main reason why I'm using Red Hat is because of its stability."
"I can control and manage everything. I know everything that's cooking inside. This is the best part for me."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is the popularity of the OS."
"It's a scalable solution."
"Customers are moving to open source and Red Hat is the leader in this particular space. I think customers feel more confident running Red Hat Virtualization than VMware."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The price is the solution's most valuable aspect. It's much cheaper than, for example, VMware."
"The solution is stable."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"The networking with wireless devices needs improvement."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"Business continuity features need to be added."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved and made more user-friendly."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"Some things are pretty basic, and they could be more robust with more detail."
"There are some issues with the graphics and some software that is very complex."
"While everything needs improvement in some way, I have no specifics."
"The solution should be made more user-friendly."
"The solution has a very small lifecycle."
"We'd like it if it would be possible on Red Hat Virtualization to possibly connect two or three VMs to the same disk."
"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."
"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."
"Configuring the network interfaces is much better in Ubuntu and should be improved."
"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."
KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 38 reviews while RHEV is ranked 10th in Server Virtualization Software with 31 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 "The solution is scalable and affordable, but it lacks features, and it is not easy to manage". 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.