We performed a comparison between KVM and Oracle VM based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, KVM comes out ahead. It has the speed, stability, and flexibility that make it a very desirable solution for today’s rapidly-changing, ever-growing tech environment. This particular Oracle product, although very mature, has not done enough to stay competitive.
"The product's scalability is good...It's a very stable product."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"I appreciate the network passcode feature in KVM, as it provides a convenient way to manage DNS and cloud hosting."
"The performance is great."
"The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before."
"It offers a high-availability environment."
"A very reliable solution which can be used for x86 architecture virtualization with reasonable overhead."
"The key aspect is that the KVM directly interacts with the Kronos. There's no clear indication of indirect communication with Kronos. It is not linked to Kronos, and interaction is straightforward without any intermediaries."
"The most valuable features of Oracle VM are live migration and snapshots."
"It's easy to adjust the size up and down."
"The product is simple and easy to use."
"It is highly esteemed for its ability to efficiently optimize and enhance the operational speed and responsiveness of virtualized environments."
"We've noticed that when working with Citrix with our Oracle clients who also use Oracle Linux, the monitoring and testing is simpler and easier for us to do."
"Overall, the biggest performance is around virtualization and automation, you can build private clouds with Oracle VM using Enterprise Manager."
"The support staff in the tech support team at Oracle has improved. I find them extremely helpful and they give very solid support."
"What I like the most is the failover and the quick restore of virtual machines."
"I have previously used VMware and KVM is easier to use. However, they both have their strengths depending on their use cases. They are mostly equal. One of VMware's advantages is it has better support."
"The networking with wireless devices needs improvement."
"I would like to see more focus on microservices and integration with Kubernetes or OpenShift."
"The only negative aspect of needing hardware support is a fully functional KVM can be dropped. It would be nice if the support for other platforms, like ARM or Risk, were as good as the x86 one. However, with the democratization of Chromebooks based on these chips and mobile devices, it will not take long for that to happen."
"Some things are pretty basic, and they could be more robust with more detail."
"We would like to have a software lifecycle solution included in this solution. We can handle the software needed for KVM, but also the software that we provide. A lifecycle component would be very beneficial."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved and made more user-friendly."
"Support for VF is needed, where you can, for example, export from VMware to KVM."
"One is the hypervisor. Right now, it’s all using Xen. What would be really helpful is to have some choice, and the underlying hypervisor technology use KVM which is very popular with certain workloads."
"The performance could be better because I need to purchase a lot of CPUs to perform in the workbench."
"The automatic start of the product to work as a background process has shortcomings and needs improvement."
"The tool's price and stability could be better."
"If you do a gap analysis between VMware and Oracle VM, you can't do VM Snapshot. That's one thing you can't do. It's a sort of a snapshot, but it's not really Snapshot technology. It requires that you're running on CFS-2."
"Something that could be improved are the snapshots that go in the ZFS Storage. If you want to enjoy Oracle VM, you will definitely want it to go together with ZFS Storage to maximize on the snapshot facility."
"Incorporating analytics related to performance, particularly within the dashboard interface, would be beneficial."
"The solution is at its end of life and is about to be discontinued."
KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 39 reviews while Oracle VM is ranked 7th in Server Virtualization Software with 78 reviews. KVM is rated 8.0, while Oracle VM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of KVM writes "Delivers good performance because of kernel-based virtualization". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle VM writes "A cheap option available for Linux environments which is useful for many workloads". KVM is most compared with Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas Oracle VM is most compared with VMware vSphere, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Proxmox VE, Hyper-V and RHEV. See our KVM vs. Oracle VM 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.