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.
"RHEV’s cost is much less compared to VMware."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is the popularity of the OS."
"It is easy to deal with when comes to application migration and its compatibility with the multiple component applications."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The solution makes migration easy."
"Red Hat is the most stable system."
"It's a scalable solution."
"The solution is overall very good with all the facilities. It is user friendly, easy to configure, has documentation, and support is available."
"The ability to create or clone a virtual environment in a short period of time for testing is most valuable."
"Its scalability potential is good."
"Since we have an internal cloud, suddenly people may require 1000 or 2000 VMS in something. We have options to analyze and make sure we have enough scalability."
"I use the ESXi a lot for my users to create their own templates and control their own VMs without my interaction."
"It is easy to manage the solution. It is scalable and very stable."
"We saved a lot of time and hardware with this solution. It also prevents fewer incidents."
"VMware vSphere is a very stable product."
"We use it to virtualize our server infrastructure. Virtualization has made it easier for us to manage our environment. We can manage it from location, the vSphere web client."
"The Administration of the Oracle database and the SAP ERP needs improvement."
"There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference."
"Red Hat by itself is not scalable. But you can have third party add-ons like Ceph to make it massively scalable."
"It lags behind in that you need to go to something like Fedora to get all the extra bells and whistles."
"It would be better to have more patches, especially kernel-level updates, live and online so that we can keep the business up and running during this period."
"This solution could be more secure."
"While everything needs improvement in some way, I have no specifics."
"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 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."
"The solution should offer more integration capabilities."
"I would like to see improvements in simplifying automation, cloud native deployment, administration, and fault resolution."
"Stability and manageability need improvement."
"VMware vSphere could improve on the automation features and the ease of use of the solution in many areas, such as the interface. However, VMware is doing lots of great things."
"We'd always like to see the price drop, but I realize that may not be realistic."
"The biggest problem in this solution is the incompatibility of some of the features with some of the drivers installed on servers. For example, if I want to install vSphere on an HPE server, the driver is really different from a Dell server or a Fujitsu server. I need to download different drivers and install them manually, which can be improved by VMware. They can offer a special image to match different servers. We face different problems when we install vSphere on an ESXi server and have different drivers on the storage. ESXi cannot detect different kinds of storage, and they should improve this. We updated our existing version to vSphere 7 in a private environment, but it seems that this version is not very stable. We are facing issues with restarting the host. In earlier versions, such as vSphere 6 or 6.5, we didn't have any such problems. It would be good if VMware can offer specific applications for mobiles to enable us to control the management of all servers by mobile. They should also improve the vCenter GUI because it is currently not compatible, and there are a lot of problems. Some of the options do not appear well in the browser. VMware should spend more time resolving the problems in the GUI."
"One problem that needs fixing is when we run the backup for the servers, the servers become inaccessible to everybody on-site while it is creating a snapshot."
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: