We performed a comparison between RHEV and VMware VSphere based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, VMware VSphere got better user reviews. One major difference between the two solutions is that users say that RHEV’s scalability is not great.
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is the popularity of the OS."
"What they provide is way beyond the essential requirements of customers."
"I can control and manage everything. I know everything that's cooking inside. This is the best part for me."
"Stability and speed are the most valuable aspects."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable feature of Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization is its pricing."
"Red Hat is the most stable system."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"VMware vSphere allows you to run multiple virtual machines."
"The most valuable features for us are HA, DRS, and SDRS."
"Also, the automated builds are being done through it, and we don't have to manually do it anymore. All of my AIS platforms are completely automated now with the VM suite."
"It is easy to maintain our data machines and take snapshots with the solution."
"The emphasis isn't specifically on a particular feature, but rather on the ease of use. For instance, when building a test lab or setting up an entire environment from scratch, VMware products are notably more user-friendly compared to alternatives like Nutanix. I've had prior experience with Nutanix. From my personal perspective, I found it easier to adapt to using VMware than when I started using Dynamics. This ease of use is a strong point. It's largely about how straightforward it is to navigate through VMware's user interface. In contrast, with Nutanix, there's a need to delve into smaller configurations and navigate vendor-specific settings. VMware, on the other hand, offers a more accessible management page. This difference primarily centres around usability and the overall user-friendliness of the interface."
"vSphere has enabled an enterprise class virtualization environment with a central point of monitoring and management stretched over multiple datacenters (multi-site use), adding all the features of clustering for high-availability and failover, VM migration, and operations."
"Stable and secure management console for virtual environments, with a diligent technical support team."
"Most valuable features are quick provisioning, High Availability, and DRS for balancing workload."
"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."
"The solution could use network virtualization."
"With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected."
"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."
"The solution should be made more user-friendly."
"It lags behind in that you need to go to something like Fedora to get all the extra bells and whistles."
"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."
"This solution could be more secure."
"An improvement could be in terms of keeping up with the upgrades. The upgrades could be set in an automated way so that the newer features don't require you to manually update, or you get an option to update automatically. This would be a useful enhancement."
"It would be great if the free version included a management tool that was a scaled-down vCenter Manager."
"The technical support is good. However, it could be more seamless when it comes to chat support and lower response times."
"The solution is stable. However, it could improve by being more secure."
"A fully **automatic** and lightweight Virtual Center. Another time this has a huge improvement in last releases. However, a more automatic and simple deployment is required."
"It could improve the hyper-conversions."
"We'd always like to see the price drop, but I realize that may not be realistic."
"As we continue to push mission-critical workloads into vSphere, and those workloads are not readily protected at the application layer for availability, continuing to increase the size limitations on FT-protected VMs would be a great advance."
RHEV is ranked 10th in Server Virtualization Software with 32 reviews while VMware vSphere is ranked 2nd in Server Virtualization Software with 446 reviews. RHEV is rated 7.6, while VMware vSphere is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of RHEV writes "Offers frameworks with well-documented API and easy to use". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware vSphere writes "Offers good performance and is useful for banking systems". RHEV is most compared with KVM, Proxmox VE, Hyper-V, Oracle VM and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas VMware vSphere is most compared with Hyper-V, Proxmox VE, VMware Workstation, Oracle VM and Citrix Hypervisor. See our RHEV vs. VMware vSphere 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.
Hi Sridhar, This is Rajkumar Gera, VP IT in one of the Telecom. Below are some of the points, may help you: