We performed a comparison between Citrix Hypervisor and RHEV 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."Ability to move your virtual machines from one host to another."
"I've found the following features to be the most valuable: user personalization layer, app layering, provisioning, and notification services for integration between different domains."
"The price is the solution's most valuable feature."
"I find it very easy to manage and at a cost that small customers would never refuse (free)."
"What I find most valuable in Citrix Hypervisor is its licensing policy, because you'll get it for free if you buy a Citrix XenDesktop license. You don't need to spend additional money on the Citrix Hypervisor because you can manage both the Citrix XenDesktop and the Citrix Hypervisor with just one license, so you can save on cost. I also like that the solution is good support-wise. Hardware support is also faster compared to other solutions."
"This is a good product for virtualization and it is easy to use."
"This is a dependable solution for virtualization with a good community for product support."
"The onboarding process is pretty straightforward."
"The solution is overall very good with all the facilities. It is user friendly, easy to configure, has documentation, and support is available."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support portal."
"The most valuable features of RHEV are all the tools, such as virtualization, management of cloud platforms, and integration of container environments. The solution has good compatibility between virtualization, content management, and cloud management. Having the full set of these tools is the advantage of it."
"What they provide is way beyond the essential requirements of customers."
"Stability and speed are the most valuable aspects."
"It's a scalable solution."
"There aren't any bugs on the solution."
"Assigning the order of virtual server startup is not very easy and this can be improved."
"The graphics user interface is pretty bad."
"The USB support for the virtual server needs improvement."
"Citrix is not investing in the virtual surroundings."
"I am not very sure about how flexible Citrix Hypervisor is with different types of infrastructures. I only know it is flexible with Nutanix, but I am not sure if it is also flexible with others. They can make its integration with other platforms or OEMs easy. They should also make it easy for users to manage their infrastructure. Citrix should make compatibility information related to a hypervisor easily available in a datasheet. Citrix isn't really recognized in this part of the world, and they need to expand their solution and make it more available. There are a lot of customers and companies that are looking for a solution like Citrix, and it should be available in this part of the world. They need to educate people more. Technically, it is good and flexible and has good ability, but it is not as much known as VMware or Microsoft. Their support should also be improved. Currently, if you don't have an updated version, they will not give you the attention."
"The solution should be more flexible and allow for greater customization."
"The solution needs better backup facilities that are available for virtual machines to create servers on."
"Live migration is something that can be improved."
"This solution could be more secure."
"Customers are not aware of this solution, they can improve by providing more awareness and solution availability."
"When we do a direct comparison, then obviously VMware does better in terms of having Fault Tolerance and doing active disaster recovery and these kind of things. This is something that can be improved within Red Hat."
"RHEV can improve by keeping pace with new features and new enhancements. They should not be halted or delayed innovation because over the past quarter the enhancements have not been as fast as they have been previously."
"The Administration of the Oracle database and the SAP ERP needs improvement."
"It would be better to have more patches, especially kernel-level updates, live and online so that we can keep the business up and running during this period."
"There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference."
"With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected."
Citrix Hypervisor is ranked 8th in Server Virtualization Software with 45 reviews while RHEV is ranked 10th in Server Virtualization Software with 31 reviews. Citrix Hypervisor is rated 8.2, while RHEV is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Citrix Hypervisor writes "Good features, fair pricing, and excellent reliability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RHEV writes "The solution is scalable and affordable, but it lacks features, and it is not easy to manage". Citrix Hypervisor is most compared with Proxmox VE, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere, Oracle VM VirtualBox and IBM PowerVM, whereas RHEV is most compared with VMware vSphere, KVM, Proxmox VE and Hyper-V. See our Citrix Hypervisor vs. RHEV 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.