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 is really good...One can get good performance because of kernel-based virtualization."
"Our production servers are running in Linux, and this solution supports that environment well."
"I think nine out of the ten supercomputers in the world use Linux KVM, so I think that attests to the fact that it is a scalable product."
"The initial setup was simple."
"Scaling the solution is easy. You just have to add more hardware."
"Very cost-effective."
"If you are a Linux desktop user, KVM is the solution to go with if you have to start virtual machines with Linux or other operating systems with almost zero extra configuration needed."
"One of the best features of KVM is its user-friendly interface."
"It's a very flexible solution because you have all the commands that you can do yourself."
"It's not a very expensive product."
"There's a lot of space to customize the solution if you need to."
"In terms of server provisioning, it only takes a few clicks of a button and a bit of install automation."
"VMware is user-friendly, with clear integration and detailed migration."
"It's a very mature product."
"It is simple and straightforward, and it will only require you one system integrator to do the job."
"Because of the virtualization for Linux, I use just Linux basically in all VMs, a few with Windows."
"Some things are pretty basic, and they could be more robust with more detail."
"We still occasionally build Interlaced Wireless Protection within our environment. The ecosystem entails areas, where we support agents, and release backup and security solutions. Collaboration with independent software vendors (ITOLs or ITOLED) is necessary to offer these solutions to customers. However, the scope of the ecosystem in KVM is not as extensive as that of VMware's. In contrast, VMware boasts a robust partner network, allowing for comprehensive customer solutions. On the other hand, KVM’s ecosystem is comparatively limited in comparison. I would like to see FT features in KVM."
"There are some issues with the graphics and some software that is very complex."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"The solution should be more user friendly. We are struggling with the command lines."
"One problem I have is that it's not very scalable when it comes to resizing the VM disk dimensions. For example, if you have initially set a virtual drive to 10 GB and you want to upgrade it to 15 GB, it's not that easy."
"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."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"I've found that using Oracle VM is like stepping back in time. It's not kept up with technology. The only reason anyone uses it is that they're afraid of Oracle's licensing. Oracle has a tremendously bad licensing approach."
"Oracle VM should be promoted more as an open-source and stable software."
"Oracle VM needs to add a backup feature."
"Its database management features could be better."
"There is no memory over-subscription and CPU over-subscription. That has to be improved in terms of Oracle VM perspective. The other leading virtualizing software solutions have this feature."
"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 automatic start of the product to work as a background process has shortcomings and needs improvement."
"Deployment should be simplified."
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.