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 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."
"If you are a Linux desktop user, KVM is the solution to go with if you have to start virtual machines with Linux or other operating systems with almost zero extra configuration 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."
"It is an open ecosystem, and we see there is a benefit in open-source solutions."
"I have found KVM to be scalable."
"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 appreciate the network passcode feature in KVM, as it provides a convenient way to manage DNS and cloud hosting."
"If you prefer command-line, there are all kinds of command-line options."
"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's a scalable solution."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is the popularity of the OS."
"I can control and manage everything. I know everything that's cooking inside. This is the best part for me."
"Technically, the main reason why I'm using Red Hat is because of its stability."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The solution is a great all-round product. The virtualization is especially good."
"We find the ease of use of this solution to be invaluable. It is user-friendly and integrates well with other software."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"The product must provide better performance monitoring features."
"Technical support is not top-notch."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"Business continuity features need to be added."
"I have encountered difficulties in getting the tool's documentation."
"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."
"The grid interface of KVM needs improvement. It could be more beautiful, especially when compared to VMware."
"The Administration of the Oracle database and the SAP ERP needs improvement."
"The biggest improvement would be more third-party direct support for things like backups and provisioning through third-party portals."
"It lags behind in that you need to go to something like Fedora to get all the extra bells and whistles."
"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 UI should be more interactive with additional features."
"There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference."
"With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected."
"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."
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.