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 is really good...One can get good performance because of kernel-based virtualization."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before."
"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."
"The initial setup was simple."
"If you prefer command-line, there are all kinds of command-line options."
"Scaling the solution is easy. You just have to add more hardware."
"It is an open ecosystem, and we see there is a benefit in open-source solutions."
"What they provide is way beyond the essential requirements of customers."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution is a great all-round product. The virtualization is especially good."
"I can control and manage everything. I know everything that's cooking inside. This is the best part for me."
"It is easy to deal with when comes to application migration and its compatibility with the multiple component applications."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization is its pricing."
"It's a scalable solution."
"Business continuity features need to be added."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"In KVM, snapshots and cloning are areas where there could be a little more sophistication, like VMware."
"I would like to see more focus on microservices and integration with Kubernetes or OpenShift."
"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."
"The speed is around thirty percent slower than another competitor. This would be something to work on."
"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."
"We'd like it if it would be possible on Red Hat Virtualization to possibly connect two or three VMs to the same disk."
"Customers are not aware of this solution, they can improve by providing more awareness and solution availability."
"Red Hat by itself is not scalable. But you can have third party add-ons like Ceph to make it massively scalable."
"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."
"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."
"With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected."
"This solution could be more secure."
"The solution could use network virtualization."
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.