Compare Citrix Hypervisor vs. KVM
 | Dan Withrow Senior Manager of Engineering at Mechanics Bank |
 | MahdiBahmani Solution Architect, IT Consultant at Merdasco - Rayan Merdas Data Prosseccing |
Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix Hypervisor vs. KVM and other solutions. Updated: January 2021.
464,655 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"This solution allows the end users to clone, start, stop, or remotely control their VMs."
"I find it very easy to manage and at a cost that small customers would never refuse (free)."
"This is a dependable solution for virtualization with a good community for product support."
"The compatibility of the solution is its most valuable feature. It's compatible on almost every cloud these days."
"The price is the solution's most valuable feature."
"The ability to move a virtual machine while it is running is a big advantage."
"The solution is easy to deploy. It's very easy to understand problems and read logs."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is very fast. It also works very well for physically small servers."
"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."
"The initial setup was simple."
"Our production servers are running in Linux, and this solution supports that environment well."
"Scaling the solution is easy. You just have to add more hardware."
"I like that this is an open-source solution. It is very powerful, and it's easy."
"The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before."
"The KVM service is well managed with a central policy interface."
"If you prefer command-line, there are all kinds of command-line options."
Cons
"The self-service user portal needs to be more granular and be more customizable."
"I would like the possibility of updating the hypervisor by applying security patches."
"Assigning the order of virtual server startup is not very easy and this can be improved."
"The solution should be more flexible and allow for greater customization."
"The manageability of the solution needs improvement. It's an extremely bad product to handle."
"It needs to have a more robust backup solution."
"The solution would benefit from faster technical support."
"The USB support for the virtual server needs improvement."
"The stability of this solution is less than other products in the same category."
"The KVM tech support is really bad. They are not very responsive."
"Support for VF is needed, where you can, for example, export from VMware to KVM."
"The solution should be more user friendly. We are struggling with the command lines."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"Business continuity features need to be added."
"The initial setup of this solution is more difficult than some of the competing products and it could be improved."
"One thing that maybe could be improved is making it easier to scale. It needs to be more clear on how to scale the storage space for virtual machines."
"The most valuable feature is the cost; it is a free product."
"To subscribe to the paid version with support, it is approximately $6,000 per year."
"There are free and paid versions. The free version is limited in features but not by time limit. The paid version has more features."
"The licensing is straight forward based on usage and features."
"While it is free for small networks, the pricing is high if your network grows past a certain size."
"We migrated from VMware to XenCenter to cut costs."
"This solution is open source, it's free."
"Citrix is a good low-cost alternative to VMware, so if budgeting is an issue then I would recommend it."
"This solution came with the Linux license."
"This solution is an open-source, free platform with paid support."
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Virtualization Software solutions are best for your needs.
464,655 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Answer: Reducing bandwidth and enhancing performance of remote users who connect to the GFMIS of Egypt Government (about 15000 users, up to 2200 concurrent users). This is achieved by application streaming of… more »
Top Answer: KVM scales better, orchestration better, performs better and supports a wider range of hardware and, also, you can implement at ZERO cost and with a very powerful web interface for management, from… more »
Top Answer: Small support team, small cluster, low core count, use VMware products
Large support team, large clusters with many cores, use KVM.
KVM scales better, orchestration better, performs better and… more »
Top Answer: Far from being an expert, my opinion is that the positive sides of KVM are:
Lower costs and open-source which gives the abilities to customize it according to the specific needs of each customer.
Views
24,332
Comparisons
21,207
Reviews
18
Average Words per Review
402
Rating
8.2
Views
85,792
Comparisons
78,397
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
445
Rating
8.0
Compared 51% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Compared 3% of the time.
Compared 35% of the time.
Compared 25% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 2% of the time.
XenServer
Citrix Hypervisor is a leading virtualization management platform optimized for application, desktop and server virtualization infrastructures. Consolidation and containment of workloads on Citrix Hypervisor enables organizations of any vertical or size to transform their business IT compute infrastructures.
KVM (for Kernel-based Virtual Machine) is a full virtualization solution for Linux on x86 hardware containing virtualization extensions (Intel VT or AMD-V). It consists of a loadable kernel module, kvm.ko, that provides the core virtualization infrastructure and a processor specific module, kvm-intel.ko or kvm-amd.ko.
Learn more about Citrix Hypervisor
Learn more about KVM
U.S. Army Shared Services Center, SoftLayer, Educational Services of America, Independent Bank, and SK Telecom.
MediaWiki, Wikimedia Foundation, Wikipedia, Wikivoyage, Wikidata, Wikiversity, Commons
University9%
Non Tech Company9%
Manufacturing Company9%
Comms Service Provider9%
Comms Service Provider34%
Computer Software Company18%
Government7%
Media Company6%
Comms Service Provider35%
Computer Software Company28%
Media Company6%
Educational Organization5%
Small Business45%
Midsize Enterprise23%
Large Enterprise32%
Small Business59%
Midsize Enterprise12%
Large Enterprise29%
Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix Hypervisor vs. KVM and other solutions. Updated: January 2021.
464,655 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Citrix Hypervisor is ranked 6th in Server Virtualization Software with 18 reviews while KVM is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 8 reviews. Citrix Hypervisor is rated 8.2, while KVM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Citrix Hypervisor writes "The ability to move a VM while it is still running and continue doing maintenance work is a big advantage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of KVM writes "Stable, easy to set up, and very easy to use". Citrix Hypervisor is most compared with Proxmox VE, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere, Oracle VM VirtualBox and Oracle VM, whereas KVM is most compared with Oracle VM VirtualBox, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere, Oracle VM and VMware Workstation. See our Citrix Hypervisor vs. KVM 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.