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."
"I like that this is an open-source solution. It is very powerful, and it's easy."
"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."
"It is an open ecosystem, and we see there is a benefit in open-source solutions."
"A very reliable solution which can be used for x86 architecture virtualization with reasonable overhead."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"I find the density of the product most valuable. It is density that a technologist can just assign page merging. This is what makes KVM one of the important players of the virtualization market."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the resource management from the OVM Manager."
"It's a very flexible solution because you have all the commands that you can do yourself."
"Overall, the biggest performance is around virtualization and automation, you can build private clouds with Oracle VM using Enterprise Manager."
"I rate Oracle VM's scalability a ten out of ten."
"The product is simple and easy to use."
"Virtualization platform that's easy to set up, and has good scalability and stability."
"Its ease of management and simplicity are most valuable. It is free, and you can provision an unlimited number of VMs at no cost for clients. They also provide perfect support."
"It is a scalable solution."
"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."
"I believe KVM offers a unified answer, while ProxMark addresses orchestration. KVM lacks orchestration. If the aim is to centrally oversee multiple KVMs – let's say to freeze them – a centralized management solution is absent."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"I would like to see more focus on microservices and integration with Kubernetes or OpenShift."
"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."
"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."
"In KVM, snapshots and cloning are areas where there could be a little more sophistication, like VMware."
"Technical support is not top-notch."
"Incorporating analytics related to performance, particularly within the dashboard interface, would be beneficial."
"I would say third-party plugins to other storage vendors. There are a lot of converged infrastructure setups; one that we have, multiple different hardware vendors. So that would be something we could definitely be looking for."
"Oracle VM is not very stable. When you encounter any issue, it's unclear what is happening."
"The pricing could be cheaper. It is very pricey."
"Oracle VM needs to add a backup feature."
"Its database management features could be better."
"The automatic start of the product to work as a background process has shortcomings and needs improvement."
"Integration with cloud products would be beneficial."
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.