Citrix Hypervisor vs KVM comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Citrix Logo
10,819 views|7,590 comparisons
80% willing to recommend
KVM Logo
Read 39 KVM reviews
34,487 views|25,688 comparisons
90% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Citrix Hypervisor and KVM 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.
To learn more, read our detailed Citrix Hypervisor vs. KVM Report (Updated: March 2024).
768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Citrix Hypervisor is simple to use.""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.""Scripting can automate procedures.""Citrix Hypervisor is quick to deploy and easy to manage.""Citrix is easy to use and is stable.""Ability to move your virtual machines from one host to another.""Installing Hypervisor is really simple. It's the simplest setup I've ever done before. We used a team to deploy it, and it doesn't take much time, like two or three hours tops.""The continued uptime of our virtual machines is good."

More Citrix Hypervisor Pros →

"If you prefer command-line, there are all kinds of command-line options.""I appreciate the network passcode feature in KVM, as it provides a convenient way to manage DNS and cloud hosting.""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.""The initial setup was simple.""KVM is stable.""Scaling the solution is easy. You just have to add more hardware.""It offers a high-availability environment.""One of the best features of KVM is its user-friendly interface."

More KVM Pros →

Cons
"Live migration is something that can be improved.""We'd like them to add more automation to the product.""There are several areas that need improvement including the stability of the networking stack and networking management.""The built-in networking features are a little limited.""Citrix is not investing in the virtual surroundings.""It needs to have a more robust backup solution.""Citrix could provide more tools to help the client manage the solution because we need to build our own tools in some cases. Everything is available through PowerShell, but then you need to build your own scripts to do the more advanced work.""Overall, I can't think of a feature that is lacking. We've been pretty satisfied overall."

More Citrix Hypervisor Cons →

"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.""Its resource usage can be improved.""The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement.""The grid interface of KVM needs improvement. It could be more beautiful, especially when compared to VMware.""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.""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.""Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack.""The initial setup of this solution is more difficult than some of the competing products and it could be improved."

More KVM Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The pricing and licensing is so important. Customers do consider the price seriously."
  • "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."
  • "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."
  • More Citrix Hypervisor Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "​It is free and can be run from your laptop, if needed, unlike VMware.​"
  • "It is cheaper than other competitors like VMware or Hyper-V."
  • "It is cheaper than other solutions out there on the market."
  • "This solution came with the Linux license."
  • "This solution is an open-source, free platform with paid support."
  • "It is free for everyone."
  • "The price is fair compared to others. But in our local market, it's a problem to get budget approval from management. That's why they are trying to get those products so we can give them the price benefit. But if you consider the international market or other products, it's sometimes better than their price."
  • "We had some problems with the licensing."
  • More KVM Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Virtualization Software solutions are best for your needs.
    768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Comparison Review
    Thang Le Toan (Victory Lee)
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Citrix Hypervisor is expensive. The cloud licenses are expensive. Only Citrix is earning money off those. It's the same with VMware and Microsoft.
    Top Answer:Citrix is not investing in the virtual surroundings. Third-party tools are bad for Citrix at the moment. No good backup recovery is available. On Microsoft, we can use Veeam, which is a great product… 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.
    Ranking
    Views
    10,819
    Comparisons
    7,590
    Reviews
    8
    Average Words per Review
    580
    Rating
    8.8
    Views
    34,487
    Comparisons
    25,688
    Reviews
    15
    Average Words per Review
    435
    Rating
    8.2
    Comparisons
    Proxmox VE logo
    Compared 27% of the time.
    Oracle VM VirtualBox logo
    Compared 13% of the time.
    Hyper-V logo
    Compared 12% of the time.
    VMware vSphere logo
    Compared 12% of the time.
    IBM PowerVM logo
    Compared 1% of the time.
    Also Known As
    XenServer
    Learn More
    KVM
    Video Not Available
    Overview

    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 stands for Kernel-based Virtual Machine, which is an open-source virtualization technology that is embedded in Linux. KVM allows users to seamlessly transform their Linux system into a hypervisor that, in turn, will enable a host machine to run numerous, isolated virtual environments or virtual machines (VMs).

    KVM is part of Linux. Users with Linux 2.6.20 or newer already have KVM. As KVM is already a component of the current Linux code, it automatically improves with every new Linux fix, feature, or upgrade. So KVM users are always current and up to date.

    KVM automatically transforms Linux to a type -1 (bare-metal) hypervisor. All hypervisors need operating system components, such as a process scheduler, I/O stack, device drivers, memory manager, and more, to run a VM. KVM already has these components embedded, as it is part of the Linux kernel. Each VM is generated as a basic Linux proces,s which is maintained by the standard Linux scheduler, with dedicated hardware such as a graphics adapter, memory, disks, network card, and CPUs.

    KVM Key Features:

    KVM has many valuable key features. Some of its most useful features include:

    • Storage: KVM has the ability to use any storage protocol supported by Linux, including network-attached storage (NAS) and some local disks. Multipath I/O can be utilized to provide redundancy and improve storage. Disk images use thin provisioning, ensuring storage is used on demand. KVM is also able to use shared file systems, enabling VM images to be shared on multiple hosts.
    • Hardware: KVM is able to use a vast number of Linux-certified supported hardware platforms. As hardware vendors routinely contribute to kernel improvement, the most up-to-date hardware features are generally quickly added to the Linux kernel.
    • Memory: KVM effectively utilizes the memory management features of Linux, such as kernel same-page emerging and non-uniform memory access. The memory of a VM can easily be switched, supported by large volumes for improved performance, then backed by a disk file or shared.
    • Migration: KVM actively supports live migration so users have the ability to move any running VM between physical hosts with no downtime.
    • Security: KVM uses a blend of secure virtualization (SVirt) and security-enhanced Linux (SELinux) for improved VM security and isolation. SELinux determines security boundaries surrounding VMs. sVirt expands SELinux’s processes, permitting Mandatory Access Control (MAC) security to be used for guest VMs and preventing any manual labeling issues.

    Reviews from Real Users

    “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. KVM, as a native virtualization solution, is a complete and fully adequate system for small businesses that need to reduce costs, and also to make maintenance easier. “ - Georges E., Business Engineer and Consultant at All-Tech

    “The most valuable feature of KVM is the hypervisor environment and how we can configure it with ease. Additionally, the interface is intuitive.” Sonu S., Senior Solution Architect at Micro Focus

    Sample Customers
    U.S. Army Shared Services Center, SoftLayer, Educational Services of America, Independent Bank, and SK Telecom.
    MediaWiki, Wikimedia Foundation, Wikipedia, Wikivoyage, Wikidata, Wikiversity, Commons
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Comms Service Provider17%
    Healthcare Company10%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Computer Software Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization48%
    Computer Software Company8%
    Comms Service Provider6%
    Government5%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company25%
    Energy/Utilities Company13%
    Aerospace/Defense Firm13%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Comms Service Provider11%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Government8%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business55%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise30%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise55%
    Large Enterprise29%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business54%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise32%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business26%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise56%
    Buyer's Guide
    Citrix Hypervisor vs. KVM
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix Hypervisor vs. KVM and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Citrix Hypervisor is ranked 8th in Server Virtualization Software with 45 reviews while KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 39 reviews. Citrix Hypervisor is rated 8.2, while KVM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Citrix Hypervisor writes "Good features, fair pricing, and excellent reliability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of KVM writes "Delivers good performance because of kernel-based virtualization". Citrix Hypervisor is most compared with Proxmox VE, VMware vSphere, Hyper-V, Oracle VM VirtualBox and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas KVM is most compared with Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere and IBM PowerVM. 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.