Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
KVM Logo
Read 39 KVM reviews
34,487 views|25,688 comparisons
90% willing to recommend
Red Hat Logo
Read 32 RHEV reviews
6,648 views|5,169 comparisons
76% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary
Updated on Sep 29, 2022

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.

  • Ease of Deployment: Users of both solutions tell us setup is easy and straightforward.
  • Features: KVM provides users with a very intuitive GUI that makes the management of KVM super easy. Users can also choose a command-line option as well. The solution provides robust security and is very cost effective. Many users feel KVM lacks high availability across clusters and would like to see more support/integration with other solutions.

    RHEV users appreciate the value-added features, such as virtualization, integration of container environments, and management of cloud platforms. The solution provides high availability and live VM migration. Users feel the solution should scale more easily and that better integration with other platforms is needed.
  • Pricing: Users of both solutions consider the pricing to be fair and reasonable.

  • Service and Support: KVM users feel the support could be better. RHEV users are very happy with the support and service they have received.

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.

To learn more, read our detailed KVM vs. RHEV Report (Updated: March 2024).
768,415 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Good screen and keyboard sharing feature.""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.""KVM is stable.""What I like most about KVM is that it's very easy to use. Everything is built-in, even when writing command lines.""I find the density of the product most valuable. It is density that a technologist can just assign page merging. This is what makes KVM one of the important players of the virtualization market.""I like that this is an open-source solution. It is very powerful, and it's easy.""It is an easily scalable solution.""There is a strong emphasis on availability, and they have numerous API interfaces for distributed storage and the solution is quite known for its openness."

More KVM Pros →

"The solution makes migration easy.""The solution is stable.""One of the most valuable features of this solution is the popularity of the OS.""Red Hat is the most stable system.""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 most valuable feature of Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization is its pricing.""Stability and speed are the most valuable aspects."

More RHEV Pros →

Cons
"We would like to have a software lifecycle solution included in this solution. We can handle the software needed for KVM, but also the software that we provide. A lifecycle component would be very beneficial.""We are not getting good support from KVM, and it is not that user-friendly.""In our setup, we do not have any dashboards or orchestration, and it is hard to manage. We have 25 gig network cards, but the software driver we have only supported 10 gigs.""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.""The speed is around thirty percent slower than another competitor. This would be something to work on.""Technical support is not top-notch.""The grid interface of KVM needs improvement. It could be more beautiful, especially when compared to VMware.""Technical support could be better. In the next release, I would like to see an improved user interface and dashboard. This type of improvement will make it easy or help our engineers understand the solution from a requirement point of view."

More KVM Cons →

"The solution has a very small lifecycle.""The UI should be more interactive with additional features.""When we do a direct comparison, then obviously VMware does better in terms of having Fault Tolerance and doing active disaster recovery and these kind of things. This is something that can be improved within Red Hat.""The solution should be made more user-friendly.""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 documentation is not as good as it should be.""While everything needs improvement in some way, I have no specifics.""There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference."

More RHEV Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "​It is free and can be run from your laptop, if needed, unlike VMware.​"
  • "It is cheaper than other competitors like VMware or Hyper-V."
  • "It is cheaper than other solutions out there on the market."
  • "This solution came with the Linux license."
  • "This solution is an open-source, free platform with paid support."
  • "It is free for everyone."
  • "The price is fair compared to others. But in our local market, it's a problem to get budget approval from management. That's why they are trying to get those products so we can give them the price benefit. But if you consider the international market or other products, it's sometimes better than their price."
  • "We had some problems with the licensing."
  • More KVM Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "This is an open-source solution."
  • "I would say the price is acceptable."
  • "We are using the free version of Red Hat."
  • "I believe we pay on a yearly basis."
  • "We buy a license for commercial use, and we also use the free editions."
  • "We have to pay extra for vulnerability and fault tolerance."
  • "The solution does not require licencing but a subscription is necessary, which is very affordable."
  • "The price of RHEV is high. It is an open-source solution, the price should be less. The price should not be on par with a solution, such as VMware. It's not more or equal to VMware, it's less, but the difference should be more substantial."
  • More RHEV Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Virtualization Software solutions are best for your needs.
    768,415 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Comparison Review
    Thang Le Toan (Victory Lee)
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:KVM scales better, orchestration better, performs better and supports a wider range of hardware and, also, you can implement at ZERO cost and with a very powerful web interface for management, from… more »
    Top Answer:Small support team, small cluster, low core count, use VMware products Large support team, large clusters with many cores, use KVM KVM scales better, orchestration better, performs better and… more »
    Top Answer:Far from being an expert, my opinion is that the positive sides of KVM are: Lower costs and open-source which gives the abilities to customize it according to the specific needs of each customer.
    Top Answer:RHEV’s cost is much less compared to VMware.
    Top Answer:It is an open-source solution. We do not need to pay the license cost if we install and manage the tool. We must purchase the license and support if we need a global patch. The subscription fee… more »
    Top Answer:Management of RHEV is not as easy as VMware. Some features do not work. The product does not provide features similar to VMware’s VMotion. After creating the cluster, the VM is moved to another node… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    34,487
    Comparisons
    25,688
    Reviews
    15
    Average Words per Review
    435
    Rating
    8.2
    Views
    6,648
    Comparisons
    5,169
    Reviews
    8
    Average Words per Review
    302
    Rating
    6.5
    Comparisons
    Proxmox VE logo
    Compared 27% of the time.
    Oracle VM VirtualBox logo
    Compared 13% of the time.
    Hyper-V logo
    Compared 12% of the time.
    VMware vSphere logo
    Compared 12% of the time.
    Citrix Hypervisor logo
    Compared 2% of the time.
    VMware vSphere logo
    Compared 47% of the time.
    Proxmox VE logo
    Compared 14% of the time.
    Hyper-V logo
    Compared 9% of the time.
    Oracle VM logo
    Compared 8% of the time.
    Nutanix AHV Virtualization logo
    Compared 4% of the time.
    Also Known As
    Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization
    Learn More
    KVM
    Video Not Available
    Overview

    KVM stands for Kernel-based Virtual Machine, which is an open-source virtualization technology that is embedded in Linux. KVM allows users to seamlessly transform their Linux system into a hypervisor that, in turn, will enable a host machine to run numerous, isolated virtual environments or virtual machines (VMs).

    KVM is part of Linux. Users with Linux 2.6.20 or newer already have KVM. As KVM is already a component of the current Linux code, it automatically improves with every new Linux fix, feature, or upgrade. So KVM users are always current and up to date.

    KVM automatically transforms Linux to a type -1 (bare-metal) hypervisor. All hypervisors need operating system components, such as a process scheduler, I/O stack, device drivers, memory manager, and more, to run a VM. KVM already has these components embedded, as it is part of the Linux kernel. Each VM is generated as a basic Linux proces,s which is maintained by the standard Linux scheduler, with dedicated hardware such as a graphics adapter, memory, disks, network card, and CPUs.

    KVM Key Features:

    KVM has many valuable key features. Some of its most useful features include:

    • Storage: KVM has the ability to use any storage protocol supported by Linux, including network-attached storage (NAS) and some local disks. Multipath I/O can be utilized to provide redundancy and improve storage. Disk images use thin provisioning, ensuring storage is used on demand. KVM is also able to use shared file systems, enabling VM images to be shared on multiple hosts.
    • Hardware: KVM is able to use a vast number of Linux-certified supported hardware platforms. As hardware vendors routinely contribute to kernel improvement, the most up-to-date hardware features are generally quickly added to the Linux kernel.
    • Memory: KVM effectively utilizes the memory management features of Linux, such as kernel same-page emerging and non-uniform memory access. The memory of a VM can easily be switched, supported by large volumes for improved performance, then backed by a disk file or shared.
    • Migration: KVM actively supports live migration so users have the ability to move any running VM between physical hosts with no downtime.
    • Security: KVM uses a blend of secure virtualization (SVirt) and security-enhanced Linux (SELinux) for improved VM security and isolation. SELinux determines security boundaries surrounding VMs. sVirt expands SELinux’s processes, permitting Mandatory Access Control (MAC) security to be used for guest VMs and preventing any manual labeling issues.

    Reviews from Real Users

    “The most helpful aspect of KVM is the fact that the interface is so minimal. It includes just what you need to set up the VMs and manage them, and it's very simple to do so. KVM, as a native virtualization solution, is a complete and fully adequate system for small businesses that need to reduce costs, and also to make maintenance easier. “ - Georges E., Business Engineer and Consultant at All-Tech

    “The most valuable feature of KVM is the hypervisor environment and how we can configure it with ease. Additionally, the interface is intuitive.” Sonu S., Senior Solution Architect at Micro Focus

    Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization, or RHEV, is a leading open standard enterprise virtualization management solution. This solution supports virtualization of servers and desktops using the same infrastructure and a single easy-to-use interface.

    Because RHEV is based on open standards, it is vendor-independent and a lot more cost effective and flexible than proprietary solutions.


    Sample Customers
    MediaWiki, Wikimedia Foundation, Wikipedia, Wikivoyage, Wikidata, Wikiversity, Commons
    Qualcomm and Bonham's Auction House.
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company25%
    Energy/Utilities Company13%
    Aerospace/Defense Firm13%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Comms Service Provider11%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Government8%
    REVIEWERS
    Comms Service Provider33%
    Computer Software Company20%
    Integrator13%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization50%
    Computer Software Company9%
    Financial Services Firm6%
    Government4%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business54%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise32%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business26%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise56%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business59%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise29%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business12%
    Midsize Enterprise56%
    Large Enterprise32%
    Buyer's Guide
    KVM vs. RHEV
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about KVM vs. RHEV and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    768,415 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    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.