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 product's scalability is good...It's a very stable product."
"The KVM service is well managed with a central policy interface."
"Scaling the solution is easy. You just have to add more hardware."
"KVM has a rich options set which can be directly used or via wrappers, such as libvirt."
"The most helpful aspect of KVM is the fact that the interface is so minimal. It includes just what you need to set up the VMs and manage them, and it's very simple to do so."
"The most valuable feature is hypervisor. I can host at the same time different operating systems in Linux Windows."
"It offers a high-availability environment."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"Nutanix AHV Virtualization has good performance and can be used for backup and disaster."
"Nutanix AHV Virtualization is a private cloud platform offering integration with various public cloud providers. This integration allows for a multi-cloud approach. In my opinion, Nutanix AHV Virtualization's strength is its storage. It innovates and excels in the hyper-converged storage segment, making it the number one choice in this area."
"The solution is stable."
"The support is excellent."
"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."
"The solution is user-friendly and provides good virtual machine backups. The user interface gets updated when there is a new release."
"Nutanix is good for new implementations on the VM side. It's very good for disaster recovery and final storage."
"It is a stable solution. I haven't faced stability issues in the solution."
"The initial setup of this solution is more difficult than some of the competing products and it could be improved."
"The speed is around thirty percent slower than another competitor. This would be something to work on."
"I have encountered difficulties in getting the tool's documentation."
"The KVM tech support is really bad. They are not very responsive."
"The grid interface of KVM needs improvement. It could be more beautiful, especially when compared to VMware."
"I would like to see more focus on microservices and integration with Kubernetes or OpenShift."
"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."
"We are not getting good support from KVM, and it is not that user-friendly."
"There is no web interface with AHV."
"When we need to share, publish, or encrypt something, we still need to perform it using the command line."
"If you want to install a specific operating system, you must first check to see if it is listed in the compatibility list; only then will you be able to install it, and that is one issue for now."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in the USB mapping."
"If we have to opt for a high level of capacity planning and need more analytics—like deciding on new purchases or budgeting, or if we need additional resources in the near future—we need to pay for Prism Central. I would suggest that Nutanix improve a bit on the analytics part of Prism Element so we can calculate those kinds of things within that flavor."
"The licensing costs are a little bit expensive."
"The solution is very 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 RHEV. 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.