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 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."
"This solution is open source and easy to configure."
"The initial setup was simple."
"The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before."
"Very cost-effective."
"I like that this is an open-source solution. It is very powerful, and it's easy."
"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."
"The product's scalability is good...It's a very stable product."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support portal."
"It is a scalable solution."
"It is easy to deal with when comes to application migration and its compatibility with the multiple component applications."
"We find the ease of use of this solution to be invaluable. It is user-friendly and integrates well with other software."
"What they provide is way beyond the essential requirements of customers."
"This solution is very stable. Much more so than similar products."
"Stability and speed are the most valuable aspects."
"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."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"There are some issues with the graphics and some software that is very complex."
"The networking with wireless devices needs improvement."
"Some things are pretty basic, and they could be more robust with more detail."
"The main drawback in the solution is probably disaster recovery."
"We are not getting good support from KVM, and it is not that user-friendly."
"The solution should be more user friendly. We are struggling with the command lines."
"In KVM, snapshots and cloning are areas where there could be a little more sophistication, like VMware."
"The Administration of the Oracle database and the SAP ERP needs improvement."
"The UI should be more interactive with additional features."
"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."
"The availability of technical expertise with the solution may be limited in some areas."
"We would like the dashboard feature of this solution to be improved, as it is not very detailed at present."
"This solution could be more secure."
"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."
"Customers are not aware of this solution, they can improve by providing more awareness and solution availability."
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.