We performed a comparison between KVM and Oracle VM based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, KVM comes out ahead. It has the speed, stability, and flexibility that make it a very desirable solution for today’s rapidly-changing, ever-growing tech environment. This particular Oracle product, although very mature, has not done enough to stay competitive.
"It offers a high-availability environment."
"I like that it's easy to manage. It's also more powerful when it comes to security than others. That point of view is the one consideration. The other consideration is that it's cost-effective."
"Scaling the solution is easy. You just have to add more hardware."
"The most valuable feature of KVM is its stability."
"I think nine out of the ten supercomputers in the world use Linux KVM, so I think that attests to the fact that it is a scalable product."
"It is easy to use, stable, and flexible. It is a pretty mature product, and it is faster than VirtualBox."
"KVM is stable."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"The stability of the product is fine."
"The product is simple and easy to use."
"The solution is very stable. I don't recall any bugs or glitches. It's reliable. It doesn't crash or freeze."
"It is very useful for the project management of our company."
"Its technical support is quite good."
"What I like best about this product is that it's free."
"The ability to live migrate VMs on the fly from one hypervisor to another has been very useful."
"It is simple and straightforward, and it will only require you one system integrator to do the job."
"The solution should be more user friendly. We are struggling with the command lines."
"The grid interface of KVM needs improvement. It could be more beautiful, especially when compared to VMware."
"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."
"Some things are pretty basic, and they could be more robust with more detail."
"The networking with wireless devices needs improvement."
"I have previously used VMware and KVM is easier to use. However, they both have their strengths depending on their use cases. They are mostly equal. One of VMware's advantages is it has better support."
"The KVM tech support is really bad. They are not very responsive."
"We still occasionally build Interlaced Wireless Protection within our environment. The ecosystem entails areas, where we support agents, and release backup and security solutions. Collaboration with independent software vendors (ITOLs or ITOLED) is necessary to offer these solutions to customers. However, the scope of the ecosystem in KVM is not as extensive as that of VMware's. In contrast, VMware boasts a robust partner network, allowing for comprehensive customer solutions. On the other hand, KVM’s ecosystem is comparatively limited in comparison. I would like to see FT features in KVM."
"Oracle's VM VirtualBox is a powerful, free, and open-source virtualization tool. However, you'll have to read a lot of documents and perform experiments in test environments to make it work for you."
"If you do a gap analysis between VMware and Oracle VM, you can't do VM Snapshot. That's one thing you can't do. It's a sort of a snapshot, but it's not really Snapshot technology. It requires that you're running on CFS-2."
"The management can be improved more, and become more agile. It would be nice for it to become more rich in terms of UI. In addition, the replication to disaster recovery needs improvement."
"Oracle VM should have centralized storage, without which you can't clone or move one VM to another."
"I would say third-party plugins to other storage vendors. There are a lot of converged infrastructure setups; one that we have, multiple different hardware vendors. So that would be something we could definitely be looking for."
"There are issues with the solution's stability since it crashes."
"You need to have a model for documentation available for the users. Right now, if you have to search for some troubleshooting, you need to have Oracle login. Many personnel might not have that login. The reach, the availability of information to the end-user, is not there."
"Something that could be improved are the snapshots that go in the ZFS Storage. If you want to enjoy Oracle VM, you will definitely want it to go together with ZFS Storage to maximize on the snapshot facility."
KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 15 reviews while Oracle VM is ranked 7th in Server Virtualization Software with 18 reviews. KVM is rated 8.0, while Oracle VM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of KVM writes "Reduces OpEx and is easy to maintain, along with low memory usage and a minimal interface". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle VM writes "Flexible solution with extensive features like OVM Manager, enabling you to avoid hard coding". KVM is most compared with Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas Oracle VM is most compared with VMware vSphere, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Proxmox VE, Hyper-V and RHEV. See our KVM vs. Oracle VM 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.