We performed a comparison between Citrix Hypervisor and IBM PowerVM 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 continued uptime of our virtual machines is good."
"This is a good product for virtualization and it is easy to use."
"The solution is extremely stable."
"Ability to move your virtual machines from one host to another."
"The most valuable features are being able to host many virtual machines and being able to patch machines."
"The compatibility of the solution is its most valuable feature. It's compatible on almost every cloud these days."
"The solution integrates well with other solutions, which makes it really strong as a primary solution to deploy."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is very fast. It also works very well for physically small servers."
"What I like about this solution, is that it is easy to configure."
"It is a stable solution with reliable performance."
"A valuable feature of PowerVM is a feature that is used for higher availability plus stream for posting, which is very useful. There's a flash copy feature which we are using. PowerVM itself, I know, helps us to control and manage our Oracle licensing compliance, since it is our hardware partitioning. This is very important. If you use VMware, there will be a licensing issue. This PowerVM is a hardware partitioner, which is very important for license compliance. We are happy with this solution."
"We always recommend PowerVM to our customers; it is better than most solutions."
"PowerVM's most valuable features include swift optimisation and real-time migration."
"The most valuable feature of IBM PowerVM is the performance of the database workload."
"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."
"The tool's performance is top-notch."
"The graphics user interface is pretty bad."
"Integration with other vendors and other applications could be improved."
"I find that the features in Citrix Hypervisor are not as rich as with VMware. It would be a benefit if they had some of the other features VMware has, such as the ability to expand a drive on the fly. You do not have to take down the machine to do it but in Citrix you do."
"Overall, I can't think of a feature that is lacking. We've been pretty satisfied overall."
"I think the technical support could be better."
"It needs improvement with the security features."
"Citrix Hypervisor is expensive if you get it as a stand-alone product, so this is one area for improvement. Its price could be cheaper. We also found other areas for improvement in Citrix Hypervisor, for example, we can't use SCIM provisioning, and there are limitations to the size of the HDD. Another area for improvement is the pass-through storage, in particular the removable storage, because that also has limitations where you can't connect to the drive if it is more than one TB."
"The product could be faster and licensing options could be improved."
"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."
"The solution should be advanced to fit with the container constantly."
"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."
"IBM PowerVM does not integrate with Microsoft."
"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."
"A GUI version of VIOS would be a great plus for people moving from Intel-based hypervisors."
"Any improvements that can be made in the interface will go a long way to helping us work better."
Citrix Hypervisor is ranked 8th in Server Virtualization Software with 45 reviews while IBM PowerVM is ranked 9th in Server Virtualization Software with 25 reviews. Citrix Hypervisor is rated 8.2, while IBM PowerVM is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Citrix Hypervisor writes "Good features, fair pricing, and excellent reliability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM PowerVM writes "A stable system for high-end data processing with a great support structure". Citrix Hypervisor is most compared with Proxmox VE, VMware vSphere, Hyper-V, KVM and Oracle VM VirtualBox, whereas IBM PowerVM is most compared with VMware vSphere, Hyper-V, KVM, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) and Proxmox VE. See our Citrix Hypervisor vs. IBM PowerVM 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.
