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.
"A very reliable solution which can be used for x86 architecture virtualization with reasonable overhead."
"One of the best features of KVM is its user-friendly interface."
"Good screen and keyboard sharing feature."
"The most valuable feature of KVM is its stability."
"It is an open ecosystem, and we see there is a benefit in open-source solutions."
"Documentation and problem-solving troubleshooting are the most valuable features. Performance (when fine-tuned and with "special" HW) is awesome, equal to or more than other enterprise closed-source solutions."
"It offers a high-availability environment."
"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 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."
"It is very stable."
"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."
"It is a scalable solution."
"I can control and manage everything. I know everything that's cooking inside. This is the best part for me."
"This solution is very stable. Much more so than similar products."
"The solution has a good licensing module."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"The speed is around thirty percent slower than another competitor. This would be something to work on."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved and made more user-friendly."
"There are some issues with the graphics and some software that is very complex."
"Business continuity features need to be added."
"Some things are pretty basic, and they could be more robust with more detail."
"We are not getting good support from KVM, and it is not that user-friendly."
"The initial setup of this solution is more difficult than some of the competing products and it could be improved."
"A few features of the product do not work as well as those in VMware."
"When we do a direct comparison, then obviously VMware does better in terms of having Fault Tolerance and doing active disaster recovery and these kind of things. This is something that can be improved within Red Hat."
"With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected."
"Configuring the network interfaces is much better in Ubuntu and should be improved."
"Customers are not aware of this solution, they can improve by providing more awareness and solution availability."
"It lags behind in that you need to go to something like Fedora to get all the extra bells and whistles."
"This solution could be more secure."
"The availability of technical expertise with the solution may be limited in some areas."
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.