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 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."
"There aren't any bugs on the solution."
"The solution is a great all-round product. The virtualization is especially good."
"It is very stable."
"The solution is overall very good with all the facilities. It is user friendly, easy to configure, has documentation, and support is available."
"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."
"It is easy to maintain our data machines and take snapshots with the solution."
"One of the most valuable features that vSphere has is its HA and DRS protection, where it can simply make sure that all the machines are always where they need to be and how they need to be taken care of. We have a lot of servers and services for emergency services for police, fire, and the like. We have the ability to use DRS as Anti-Affinity Rules to make sure that those redundant server pairs always stay away from each other. But then, if anything would happen to one of them, we have HA to be able to come up and bring it right up and going again."
"I use customization to prevent any network and DNS collisions to the router."
"Some of the most valuable features are: the ability to Snapshot so that when we do updates we have a layer of protection for simplified rollback; the replication that we can leverage for data center failures and data center downtime; the ease of migrating workloads from physical device to physical device for maintenance that we have to do on physical servers."
"I have found the Storage vMotion feature to be the most valuable."
"Cross vendor integration is in my opinion one of the best features."
"It is very versatile. All features are beneficial and very good, especially DRS and resource pooling."
"The ability to monitor resource utilization."
"Red Hat by itself is not scalable. But you can have third party add-ons like Ceph to make it massively scalable."
"There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference."
"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."
"Configuring the network interfaces is much better in Ubuntu and should be improved."
"We'd like it if it would be possible on Red Hat Virtualization to possibly connect two or three VMs to the same disk."
"The solution could use network virtualization."
"With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected."
"There are certain tools the can't run in parallel and occasionally, in those instances, we have trouble migrating customers from one source to our data center."
"I can't speak to any missing features. It has everything I need."
"There should be a bit more flexibility in terms of the hardware we can use with the product."
"Sometimes it's impossible to prevent problems from happening. With vSphere, you never know where the problem is going to come from, but you will always know that there is a problem. This is the problem."
"The management could be simplified for base-level customers, but of course, it would be difficult to match all customer needs."
"In the last couple of years, the breaking apart of specific added benefits and charging license upcharges for them. That would be the only negative thing that I have to say: As a large consumer of the Hypervisor, we have a hard time justifying the cost of utilizing the extra products, especially when it's a couple of grand here and there, a couple of hundred dollars here and there. It's hard for an IT administrator or an architect to sell to upper management. When they're seeing so much ROI from the Hypervisor, it's hard to show them that there is extra value in the additional products that can be tied on top."
"Its price could be better. It is expensive, and its price is a big concern."
"The integration with containers should be addressed."
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, Oracle VM, VMware Workstation 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: