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.
"It offers a high-availability environment."
"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."
"What I like most about KVM is that it's very easy to use. Everything is built-in, even when writing command lines."
"Very cost-effective."
"KVM has a rich options set which can be directly used or via wrappers, such as libvirt."
"The performance is great."
"One of the best features of KVM is its user-friendly interface."
"It is easy to use, stable, and flexible. It is a pretty mature product, and it is faster than VirtualBox."
"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."
"What they provide is way beyond the essential requirements of customers."
"The price is the solution's most valuable aspect. It's much cheaper than, for example, VMware."
"There aren't any bugs on the solution."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution makes migration easy."
"The solution is a great all-round product. The virtualization is especially good."
"Red Hat is the most stable system."
"Support for VF is needed, where you can, for example, export from VMware to KVM."
"I have previously used VMware and KVM is easier to use. However, they both have their strengths depending on their use cases. They are mostly equal. One of VMware's advantages is it has better support."
"I would like to see more focus on microservices and integration with Kubernetes or OpenShift."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"I have encountered difficulties in getting the tool's documentation."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"The main drawback in the solution is probably disaster recovery."
"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."
"The UI should be more interactive with additional features."
"The availability of technical expertise with the solution may be limited in some areas."
"Customers are not aware of this solution, they can improve by providing more awareness and solution availability."
"A few features of the product do not work as well as those in VMware."
"The solution should be made more user-friendly."
"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."
"The documentation is not as good as it should be."
"We'd like it if it would be possible on Red Hat Virtualization to possibly connect two or three VMs to the same disk."
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.