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.
"The product's scalability is good...It's a very stable product."
"What I like most about KVM is that it's very easy to use. Everything is built-in, even when writing command lines."
"Scaling the solution is easy. You just have to add more hardware."
"A very reliable solution which can be used for x86 architecture virtualization with reasonable overhead."
"KVM has a rich options set which can be directly used or via wrappers, such as libvirt."
"The most valuable feature of KVM is its stability."
"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 a scalable solution."
"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."
"This solution is very stable. Much more so than similar products."
"The most valuable feature of Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization is its pricing."
"The solution is stable."
"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."
"Stability and speed are the most valuable aspects."
"Technically, the main reason why I'm using Red Hat is because of its stability."
"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."
"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."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"The speed is around thirty percent slower than another competitor. This would be something to work on."
"Some things are pretty basic, and they could be more robust with more detail."
"The main drawback in the solution is probably disaster recovery."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved and made more user-friendly."
"There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference."
"The availability of technical expertise with the solution may be limited in some areas."
"The Administration of the Oracle database and the SAP ERP needs improvement."
"With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected."
"We'd like it if it would be possible on Red Hat Virtualization to possibly connect two or three VMs to the same disk."
"We would like the dashboard feature of this solution to be improved, as it is not very detailed at present."
"Configuring the network interfaces is much better in Ubuntu and should be improved."
"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.