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.
"This solution is very stable. Much more so than similar products."
"Stability and speed are the most valuable aspects."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support portal."
"Technically, the main reason why I'm using Red Hat is because of its stability."
"The price is the solution's most valuable aspect. It's much cheaper than, for example, VMware."
"It's a scalable solution."
"The solution is a great all-round product. The virtualization is especially good."
"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."
"I like that it's like a distributed rescheduler. You can move to and use VMotion as well. You can move the server and move the virtual machines around different physical servers. This makes it easier when it comes to redundancy."
"The connectivity is fantastic, and many functions can run together in one server. If you need to scale, we can continue to add components or modules. It's a beautiful virtual solution that has many advantages over physical hardware, where you have to use devices and wiring to connect all your projects."
"It is easy to maintain our data machines and take snapshots with the solution."
"vMotion is one of the most useful features, which helps to provide both flexibility and High Availability. With new versions of vSphere and vCenter, it is still improving (e.g., vMotion across vCenter Servers and virtual switches)."
"Using vSphere we have virtualized over one thousand servers and this gave us management, cost and datacenter space advantages."
"Technical support is quite good and very responsive."
"Performance; We have seen a performance boost because we have been able to more dynamically allocate either memory or processors."
"We can slide in new resources without any impact. We can do maintenance on our clusters without any impact to applications, and we have the flexibility of migrating those workloads to other data centers, when required, in the case of data center downtime."
"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."
"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."
"It lags behind in that you need to go to something like Fedora to get all the extra bells and whistles."
"The solution could use network virtualization."
"We'd like it if it would be possible on Red Hat Virtualization to possibly connect two or three VMs to the same disk."
"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."
"We hope that Red Hat can produce a paradigm edition. We are looking for paradigm computing and paradigm storage. Its scalability can be improved. It is not easy to scale, and we hope that Red Hat can provide a more scalable system. They should also provide local service and support. Our customers are looking for a good software vendor to provide professional services."
"There are some challenges around ESXi hosts — converting them into VMs."
"The implementation of VMware vSphere is easy. For integration companies, it's easy, the final client cannot do it alone but for an implementor it's easy."
"The biggest room for improvement would be just simplicity. It is very intuitive, but it needs somebody with a lot of IT background."
"We need to improve availability and disaster recovery in VMware vSphere."
"The solution could be more stable."
"The price is a big issue for us because the market is very competitive in our country, so we can't really push our VMware vSphere products because the customers will prefer to use something cheaper."
"The one area where I would love to see an improvement is the HTML5 client. It's great, but it could get better."
"The solution's technical team is an area with certain shortcomings where improvements are required."
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: