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.
"The most valuable features of RHEV are all the tools, such as virtualization, management of cloud platforms, and integration of container environments. The solution has good compatibility between virtualization, content management, and cloud management. Having the full set of these tools is the advantage of it."
"It's a scalable solution."
"Technically, the main reason why I'm using Red Hat is because of its stability."
"Stability and speed are the most valuable aspects."
"This solution is very stable. Much more so than similar products."
"The solution is overall very good with all the facilities. It is user friendly, easy to configure, has documentation, and support is available."
"The solution makes migration easy."
"The most valuable feature of Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization is its pricing."
"Its scalability potential is good."
"The most important feature is the ability to balance the servers with Distributed Resource Scheduler (DRS). It is a very useful feature and should be mandatory for vSphere to have but it is only available in the enterprise edition. It should be available in all versions."
"The most valuable feature of vSphere is its modularity. I also like the maturity updates. It's available everywhere and almost all the data centers are using it."
"Technical support is helpful and always available."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the overall virtualization technology and the new features that allow you to move servers from one system to another."
"The solution has many valuable features. Virtualization is flexible and it has simple clustering. However, the most important feature is the ability to move between VMs. The vMotion features are very good."
"It's very transparent and independent."
"It is fairly easy to use and has enhanced security."
"The solution should be made more user-friendly."
"We'd like it if it would be possible on Red Hat Virtualization to possibly connect two or three VMs to the same disk."
"With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected."
"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."
"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."
"There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference."
"The availability of technical expertise with the solution may be limited in some areas."
"On the older version of VMware vSphere, possibly version four, we had a feature that allowed us to backup Ziploc machines. It has not been available in the newer version such as six or seven. I have been looking for another solution to accomplish the backups but they should bring back this plugin-type tool to allow older backup capabilities."
"The solution could be a bit more user-friendly."
"The vSphere Client always feels slow, and/or like it doesn't keep up with what I'm trying to do. So I usually use the thick client most of the time."
"We want to see improvement from VMware with security. We want minimal downtime. We want automation. We want to deploy more efficiently."
"I would like to see AI in future releases."
"I would like to see a more automated upgrade, where you take the other products into account, so you can upgrade the entire VMware stack from a single interface."
"An area for improvement is that when comparing VMware to Nutanix, Nutanix has higher availability, like clustering for virtual machines. That is a good idea and VMware could profit from something like that for higher availability installations."
"The licensing costs for the solution are quite high."
RHEV is ranked 10th in Server Virtualization Software with 31 reviews while VMware vSphere is ranked 2nd in Server Virtualization Software with 443 reviews. RHEV is rated 7.6, while VMware vSphere is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of RHEV writes "The solution is scalable and affordable, but it lacks features, and it is not easy to manage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware vSphere writes "Allows for easy management of snapshots for virtual machines and good web console ". 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: