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.
"Very cost-effective."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"If you prefer command-line, there are all kinds of command-line options."
"One of the best features of KVM is its user-friendly interface."
"The initial setup was simple."
"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."
"What I like most about KVM is that it's very easy to use. Everything is built-in, even when writing command lines."
"Our production servers are running in Linux, and this solution supports that environment well."
"It's a scalable solution."
"Stability and speed are the most valuable aspects."
"The solution makes migration easy."
"The price is the solution's most valuable aspect. It's much cheaper than, for example, VMware."
"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 is a scalable solution."
"The solution has a good licensing module."
"What they provide is way beyond the essential requirements of customers."
"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."
"Technical support is not top-notch."
"The only negative aspect of needing hardware support is a fully functional KVM can be dropped. It would be nice if the support for other platforms, like ARM or Risk, were as good as the x86 one. However, with the democratization of Chromebooks based on these chips and mobile devices, it will not take long for that to happen."
"In KVM, snapshots and cloning are areas where there could be a little more sophistication, like VMware."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"The grid interface of KVM needs improvement. It could be more beautiful, especially when compared to VMware."
"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."
"I believe KVM offers a unified answer, while ProxMark addresses orchestration. KVM lacks orchestration. If the aim is to centrally oversee multiple KVMs – let's say to freeze them – a centralized management solution is absent."
"There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference."
"The Administration of the Oracle database and the SAP ERP needs improvement."
"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."
"The solution should be made more user-friendly."
"The documentation is not as good as it should be."
"With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected."
"The availability of technical expertise with the solution may be limited in some areas."
"A few features of the product do not work as well as those in VMware."
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.