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.
"This solution is open source and easy to configure."
"The initial setup was simple."
"I appreciate the network passcode feature in KVM, as it provides a convenient way to manage DNS and cloud hosting."
"Our production servers are running in Linux, and this solution supports that environment well."
"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."
"I think nine out of the ten supercomputers in the world use Linux KVM, so I think that attests to the fact that it is a scalable product."
"What I like most about KVM is that it's very easy to use. Everything is built-in, even when writing command lines."
"I have found KVM to be scalable."
"It's a scalable solution."
"We find the ease of use of this solution to be invaluable. It is user-friendly and integrates well with other software."
"Red Hat is the most stable system."
"The solution makes migration easy."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support portal."
"There aren't any bugs on the solution."
"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."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"Business continuity features need to be added."
"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."
"Support for VF is needed, where you can, for example, export from VMware to KVM."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"There are some issues with the graphics and some software that is very complex."
"The stability of this solution is less than other products in the same category."
"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."
"It would be better to have more patches, especially kernel-level updates, live and online so that we can keep the business up and running during this period."
"We'd like it if it would be possible on Red Hat Virtualization to possibly connect two or three VMs to the same disk."
"The UI should be more interactive with additional features."
"The support is tricky in a few places. We're facing some challenges within Malaysia where we don't really have the system integrators available who can provide extended support. When we need personnel on-site, we can't get them."
"Red Hat by itself is not scalable. But you can have third party add-ons like Ceph to make it massively scalable."
"It lags behind in that you need to go to something like Fedora to get all the extra bells and whistles."
"Configuring the network interfaces is much better in Ubuntu and should be improved."
KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 38 reviews while RHEV is ranked 10th in Server Virtualization Software with 31 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 "The solution is scalable and affordable, but it lacks features, and it is not easy to manage". 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.