We performed a comparison between KVM and Nutanix AHV based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below
Comparison Results: KVM has a slight edge in this comparison. It received higher marks for its user interface than Nutanix AHV did.
"The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before."
"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."
"I appreciate the network passcode feature in KVM, as it provides a convenient way to manage DNS and cloud hosting."
"A very reliable solution which can be used for x86 architecture virtualization with reasonable overhead."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"The key aspect is that the KVM directly interacts with the Kronos. There's no clear indication of indirect communication with Kronos. It is not linked to Kronos, and interaction is straightforward without any intermediaries."
"The initial setup was simple."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"For our markets here in Morocco, we are mainly working with server virtualization, and the most valuable feature is the software-defined storage and hyper-converged infrastructure."
"Simplicity is the most valuable feature."
"It has a vs switch for the people who know Linux, in case it's easier for them to use AHV than it is to use VMware."
"This solution is very stable and it has been running for the last three months, with no issues."
"The interface is very good, and quite user-friendly."
"The entirety of the infrastructure resides in the same product, which makes it easy to troubleshoot and investigate problems."
"Integration is the most valuable feature of the product."
"Using AHV, we have a built-in VR solution. It operates using a reduplication-based unique package transfer process."
"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."
"Technical support is not top-notch."
"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."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"In KVM, snapshots and cloning are areas where there could be a little more sophistication, like VMware."
"The main drawback in the solution is probably disaster recovery."
"There are some issues with the graphics and some software that is very complex."
"An improvement would be for Nutanix AHV to support VMDK, AOS, Hyper-V, and VMware."
"I would like to see better decompression or degrouping of the VMs so that we can use a single number of SQLs with two servers. We don't need a huge number of DXSPs."
"The management console needs to improve to make it easier for administrators. For example, to be able to reorganize our VMs, folders, and subfolders, similarly as it is provided in VMware. We can sort, manage, and organize VMs, folders, or subfolders in VMware."
"Some companies do not support AHV."
"The technical support for this solution needs to be improved in terms of response time."
"A lot of tasks cannot be performed using the GUI, the graphical interface."
"There is no web interface with AHV."
"The licensing costs are a little bit expensive."
KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 39 reviews while Nutanix AHV Virtualization is ranked 6th in Server Virtualization Software with 44 reviews. KVM is rated 8.0, while Nutanix AHV Virtualization is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of KVM writes "Delivers good performance because of kernel-based virtualization". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nutanix AHV Virtualization writes "Lightweight, integrates well, and the technical support is responsive". KVM is most compared with Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere and RHEV, whereas Nutanix AHV Virtualization is most compared with Proxmox VE, VMware vSphere, Hyper-V, Citrix Hypervisor and Oracle VM. See our KVM vs. Nutanix AHV Virtualization 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.