We performed a comparison between IBM PowerVM and Proxmox VE based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Server Virtualization Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features in this solution are you do not get degradation in the performance like you could get in other solutions. There is a physical adapter that is better than a virtual one and you can assign adapters to a VM."
"You can increase resources with it automatically."
"It's in English, so its exceptional qualities make the control environment more flexible, easier, more stable, and easy to recover after issues."
"The valuable feature of the solution is the technical aspects, focusing on elements like processor infinity."
"It is a stable solution with reliable performance."
"The tool's performance is top-notch."
"The stability is the most valuable aspect of this solution. IBM is the most powerful and stable platform."
"Managing other operating systems is also straightforward with IBM PowerVM."
"We had issues with this solution when it comes to resources. We have officially created four to five PMs and it just continues to make more resources even though they are delivered in the main post mode."
"The most valuable feature of Proxmox VE is the speed. Additionally, I can modify the solution if needed because it is open-source and the integration of any kind of API and monitoring is hassle-free."
"Its compatibility is most valuable."
"It is a community-based solution."
"We are happy with Proxmox VE. We use it as part of a cluster."
"In addition to the virtualization, the firewall and the routing functions that it provides are valuable."
"There are many features included with Proxmox."
"One of the standout features of Proxmox VE is its meticulously crafted web user interface, which is not only highly efficient but also exceptionally clear and user-friendly."
"I don't know whether this has been trialed already, but IBM should give us an alert when we reach seven or eight failovers so that we can automatically switch it to manual mode. That would be great because if we cross the 10-day licensing limit, we have to pay a hefty license cost to Oracle. If IBM could view that feature, it would be helpful in license compliance."
"If it could actually virtualize the entire platform it might be better. If you're having more than one virtualization technology, maybe there's a way to actually have less - one technology to run the data center and maybe one special virtualization for power. If it integrated with other platforms more effectively it might be better."
"As understand it, IBM sells all its hardware to Lenovo, and only PCs servers are managed by IBM. It's uncertain how much longer IBM will continue in this way, especially with the current trend of transitioning from on-premises to cloud and hybrid models. The market is evolving. Given this market shift, it's essential to identify areas for improvement. IBM has introduced the PowerVM Series, including Linux, which is a positive step. However, customers are already moving towards x86 servers due to cost considerations. The cost of PowerVM compared to x86 servers appears to be a significant factor."
"The product's pricing could be less expensive compared to other competitors."
"SRM for site recovery is a feature that should be included."
"This solution is lacking the ability to have servers act as a cluster, such as in VMware. IBM has come out with a feature similar to VMware's vCenter but it is not as mature. They need to add LPM shared-nothing feature, such as in vMotion."
"IBM PowerVM does not integrate with Microsoft."
"I would like for IBM to be more focuses on the cloud."
"The management can be better. It's not like VMware where you can get all clusters on a single dashboard. In VMware, you can literally see all the VMs running in one cluster regardless of the host."
"We find it difficult to find the root cause of the issues."
"We have only command lines for a management application to remove sites. The solution needs a proper GUI."
"I would like to see more monitoring in the next release of this solution."
"The product is still a little young so it is maturing, but new features are coming out all the time."
"Proxmox VE needs improvement in cloud computing."
"My impression is that currently, this solution is not stable even after multiple versions of improvements."
"One issue with Proxmox is that some processes are not automatic. For some processes, you have to do it manually by command line."
IBM PowerVM is ranked 9th in Server Virtualization Software with 27 reviews while Proxmox VE is ranked 1st in Server Virtualization Software with 58 reviews. IBM PowerVM is rated 8.4, while Proxmox VE is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of IBM PowerVM writes "A stable system for high-end data processing with a great support structure". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Proxmox VE writes "Easy to use and supports multi-monitors on multiple VMs in KVM". IBM PowerVM is most compared with VMware vSphere, Hyper-V, KVM, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) and Oracle VM VirtualBox, whereas Proxmox VE is most compared with VMware vSphere, Oracle VM VirtualBox, KVM, Nutanix AHV Virtualization and Odin Virtuozzo Containers. See our IBM PowerVM vs. Proxmox VE 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.