Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
KVM Logo
Read 38 KVM reviews
36,025 views|26,719 comparisons
Red Hat Logo
Read 31 RHEV reviews
6,787 views|5,299 comparisons
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary
Updated on Sep 29, 2022

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.

  • Ease of Deployment: Users of both solutions tell us setup is easy and straightforward.
  • Features: KVM provides users with a very intuitive GUI that makes the management of KVM super easy. Users can also choose a command-line option as well. The solution provides robust security and is very cost effective. Many users feel KVM lacks high availability across clusters and would like to see more support/integration with other solutions.

    RHEV users appreciate the value-added features, such as virtualization, integration of container environments, and management of cloud platforms. The solution provides high availability and live VM migration. Users feel the solution should scale more easily and that better integration with other platforms is needed.
  • Pricing: Users of both solutions consider the pricing to be fair and reasonable.

  • Service and Support: KVM users feel the support could be better. RHEV users are very happy with the support and service they have received.

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.

To learn more, read our detailed KVM vs. RHEV Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The most valuable feature of KVM is its stability.""The key aspect is that the KVM directly interacts with the Kronos. There's no clear indication of indirect communication with Kronos. It is not linked to Kronos, and interaction is straightforward without any intermediaries.""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.""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.""It offers a high-availability environment.""The KVM service is well managed with a central policy interface.""Good screen and keyboard sharing feature.""It is an easily scalable solution."

More KVM Pros →

"RHEV’s cost is much less compared to VMware.""The solution has a good licensing module.""The solution is overall very good with all the facilities. It is user friendly, easy to configure, has documentation, and support is available.""The most valuable feature of Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization is its pricing.""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 most valuable feature of this solution is the support portal."

More RHEV Pros →

Cons
"Support for VF is needed, where you can, for example, export from VMware to KVM.""There are some issues with the graphics and some software that is very complex.""I have encountered difficulties in getting the tool's documentation.""Some things are pretty basic, and they could be more robust with more detail.""Its resource usage can be improved.""Technical support could be better. In the next release, I would like to see an improved user interface and dashboard. This type of improvement will make it easy or help our engineers understand the solution from a requirement point of view.""The grid interface of KVM needs improvement. It could be more beautiful, especially when compared to VMware.""The KVM tech support is really bad. They are not very responsive."

More KVM Cons →

"The documentation is not as good as it should be.""The solution has a very small lifecycle.""Customers are not aware of this solution, they can improve by providing more awareness and solution availability.""While everything needs improvement in some way, I have no specifics.""This solution could be more secure.""In comparison to VMware, this solution isn't as stable. We're testing it right now, and we're not trusting the stability of the product.""Red Hat by itself is not scalable. But you can have third party add-ons like Ceph to make it massively scalable.""RHEV can improve by keeping pace with new features and new enhancements. They should not be halted or delayed innovation because over the past quarter the enhancements have not been as fast as they have been previously."

More RHEV Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "​It is free and can be run from your laptop, if needed, unlike VMware.​"
  • "It is cheaper than other competitors like VMware or Hyper-V."
  • "It is cheaper than other solutions out there on the market."
  • "This solution came with the Linux license."
  • "This solution is an open-source, free platform with paid support."
  • "It is free for everyone."
  • "The price is fair compared to others. But in our local market, it's a problem to get budget approval from management. That's why they are trying to get those products so we can give them the price benefit. But if you consider the international market or other products, it's sometimes better than their price."
  • "We had some problems with the licensing."
  • More KVM Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "This is an open-source solution."
  • "I would say the price is acceptable."
  • "We are using the free version of Red Hat."
  • "I believe we pay on a yearly basis."
  • "We buy a license for commercial use, and we also use the free editions."
  • "We have to pay extra for vulnerability and fault tolerance."
  • "The solution does not require licencing but a subscription is necessary, which is very affordable."
  • "The price of RHEV is high. It is an open-source solution, the price should be less. The price should not be on par with a solution, such as VMware. It's not more or equal to VMware, it's less, but the difference should be more substantial."
  • More RHEV Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Virtualization Software solutions are best for your needs.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Comparison Review
    Thang Le Toan (Victory Lee)
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:KVM scales better, orchestration better, performs better and supports a wider range of hardware and, also, you can implement at ZERO cost and with a very powerful web interface for management, from… more »
    Top Answer:Small support team, small cluster, low core count, use VMware products Large support team, large clusters with many cores, use KVM KVM scales better, orchestration better, performs better and… more »
    Top Answer:Far from being an expert, my opinion is that the positive sides of KVM are: Lower costs and open-source which gives the abilities to customize it according to the specific needs of each customer.
    Top Answer:RHEV’s cost is much less compared to VMware.
    Top Answer:It is an open-source solution. We do not need to pay the license cost if we install and manage the tool. We must purchase the license and support if we need a global patch. The subscription fee… more »
    Top Answer:Management of RHEV is not as easy as VMware. Some features do not work. The product does not provide features similar to VMware’s VMotion. After creating the cluster, the VM is moved to another node… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    36,025
    Comparisons
    26,719
    Reviews
    13
    Average Words per Review
    444
    Rating
    8.5
    Views
    6,787
    Comparisons
    5,299
    Reviews
    8
    Average Words per Review
    302
    Rating
    6.5
    Comparisons
    Proxmox VE logo
    Compared 29% of the time.
    Oracle VM VirtualBox logo
    Compared 13% of the time.
    Hyper-V logo
    Compared 11% of the time.
    VMware vSphere logo
    Compared 11% of the time.
    Citrix Hypervisor logo
    Compared 2% of the time.
    VMware vSphere logo
    Compared 46% of the time.
    Proxmox VE logo
    Compared 14% of the time.
    Hyper-V logo
    Compared 10% of the time.
    Oracle VM logo
    Compared 8% of the time.
    Nutanix AHV Virtualization logo
    Compared 4% of the time.
    Also Known As
    Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization
    Learn More
    KVM
    Video Not Available
    Overview

    KVM stands for Kernel-based Virtual Machine, which is an open-source virtualization technology that is embedded in Linux. KVM allows users to seamlessly transform their Linux system into a hypervisor that, in turn, will enable a host machine to run numerous, isolated virtual environments or virtual machines (VMs).

    KVM is part of Linux. Users with Linux 2.6.20 or newer already have KVM. As KVM is already a component of the current Linux code, it automatically improves with every new Linux fix, feature, or upgrade. So KVM users are always current and up to date.

    KVM automatically transforms Linux to a type -1 (bare-metal) hypervisor. All hypervisors need operating system components, such as a process scheduler, I/O stack, device drivers, memory manager, and more, to run a VM. KVM already has these components embedded, as it is part of the Linux kernel. Each VM is generated as a basic Linux proces,s which is maintained by the standard Linux scheduler, with dedicated hardware such as a graphics adapter, memory, disks, network card, and CPUs.

    KVM Key Features:

    KVM has many valuable key features. Some of its most useful features include:

    • Storage: KVM has the ability to use any storage protocol supported by Linux, including network-attached storage (NAS) and some local disks. Multipath I/O can be utilized to provide redundancy and improve storage. Disk images use thin provisioning, ensuring storage is used on demand. KVM is also able to use shared file systems, enabling VM images to be shared on multiple hosts.
    • Hardware: KVM is able to use a vast number of Linux-certified supported hardware platforms. As hardware vendors routinely contribute to kernel improvement, the most up-to-date hardware features are generally quickly added to the Linux kernel.
    • Memory: KVM effectively utilizes the memory management features of Linux, such as kernel same-page emerging and non-uniform memory access. The memory of a VM can easily be switched, supported by large volumes for improved performance, then backed by a disk file or shared.
    • Migration: KVM actively supports live migration so users have the ability to move any running VM between physical hosts with no downtime.
    • Security: KVM uses a blend of secure virtualization (SVirt) and security-enhanced Linux (SELinux) for improved VM security and isolation. SELinux determines security boundaries surrounding VMs. sVirt expands SELinux’s processes, permitting Mandatory Access Control (MAC) security to be used for guest VMs and preventing any manual labeling issues.

    Reviews from Real Users

    “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. KVM, as a native virtualization solution, is a complete and fully adequate system for small businesses that need to reduce costs, and also to make maintenance easier. “ - Georges E., Business Engineer and Consultant at All-Tech

    “The most valuable feature of KVM is the hypervisor environment and how we can configure it with ease. Additionally, the interface is intuitive.” Sonu S., Senior Solution Architect at Micro Focus

    Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization, or RHEV, is a leading open standard enterprise virtualization management solution. This solution supports virtualization of servers and desktops using the same infrastructure and a single easy-to-use interface.

    Because RHEV is based on open standards, it is vendor-independent and a lot more cost effective and flexible than proprietary solutions.


    Sample Customers
    MediaWiki, Wikimedia Foundation, Wikipedia, Wikivoyage, Wikidata, Wikiversity, Commons
    Qualcomm and Bonham's Auction House.
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company27%
    Energy/Utilities Company13%
    Aerospace/Defense Firm13%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Comms Service Provider12%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Government8%
    REVIEWERS
    Comms Service Provider33%
    Computer Software Company20%
    Integrator13%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization50%
    Computer Software Company9%
    Financial Services Firm6%
    Government4%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business53%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise33%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business26%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise56%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business58%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise30%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business12%
    Midsize Enterprise56%
    Large Enterprise32%
    Buyer's Guide
    KVM vs. RHEV
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about KVM vs. RHEV and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    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.