We performed a comparison between Nutanix AHV Virtualization and Oracle VM VirtualBox 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."The dashboard of the solution is one of its strongest points."
"Nutanix AHV virtualization requires little disk size for a huge number of servers. We can do everything from a single dashboard, monitoring performance, and single-task boxes."
"The most valuable feature of Nutanix AHV is that it can be managed through Hyper-V, which is Microsoft's hypervisor, VMware, and Citrix XenServer."
"It is a stable solution. I haven't faced stability issues in the solution."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is that you don't need to pay for it, it's free, as opposed to paying for a VMware license."
"Nutanix AHV's most valuable feature is NetFlow."
"The support is excellent."
"With AHV, you can run micro-segmentation, which is, on the network security level, to have network virtualization across clouds."
"The solution is very convenient and easy to use."
"This is a good and easy solution for running virtual environments."
"This is a highly scalable solution."
"I think VirtualBox has good stability because I use it in an environment with several resolutions."
"It's a pretty good product in terms of monitoring."
"VirtualBox provides an isolated, consistent environment"
"The scalability of the solution is very good."
"The flexibility and the closed platform, so it allows you to run in multiple platforms, Windows, Linux, Macintosh."
"It worked well in the beginning but after using it for some time, we found some limitations in terms of compatibility with other software."
"The solution is very expensive."
"There is no web interface for AHV."
"There is room for improvement in the USB mapping."
"To face no complications in our company, we had to switch off virtual machines one after the other before heading to Nutanix platform and going to edge services to switch off and turn off everything, making it a challenging process for me."
"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."
"Honestly, there's a lot to work on the product, especially for someone like me who has worked on VMware. VMware offers a significant level of customization when configuring virtual machines, and that level of detail is not as pronounced on Nutanix AHV Virtualization."
"It would be better if the solution's replication to another site could be efficiently optimized."
"The installation is difficult and could be improved."
"The solution is a bit less stable than I would like."
"We're working with them to be able to allow the local USB ports to be ported over to the remote desktop, running VirtualBox."
"The solution should work to simplify the system. However, it should be flexible enough to allow for special cases."
"The product lacks scalability since it is for desktops and not for servers."
"The technical support needs to improve."
"It has some issues when you have some weird device drivers. For instance, when you have a weird sound driver working on your machine, and the VirtualBox needs to output the sound of the virtual machine into the sound driver of the physical machine, the bare metal, it doesn't work too well. If you tweak lots of drivers and play around with the different kinds of drivers and machines, you will probably break something. I have not played with it too much and maybe it already supports it, but it would probably be good to have the ability to use a container from the virtual machine environment instead of spinning off a complete virtual machine. There are other tools for that. On Linux, you have a DXE, LXC framework, and you have Docker as well. Docker is good because it is multi-platform, and you can run Docker on pretty much anything, even different processors, but it would be good if we had a VirtualBox running on it while spinning off containers instead of full virtual machines. The other thing that will become important, and I'm pretty sure that they are thinking about it as well is that there's this new hardware platform that Apple is releasing, which is an ARM-based new chip. So, VirtualBox will probably have to work on ARM-based CPUs as well."
"Oracle needs to improve its hot virtual machine migration. It didn't work as intended. It should allow us to migrate between virtual machines, without stopping the database."
Nutanix AHV Virtualization is ranked 6th in Server Virtualization Software with 44 reviews while Oracle VM VirtualBox is ranked 5th in Server Virtualization Software with 61 reviews. Nutanix AHV Virtualization is rated 8.6, while Oracle VM VirtualBox is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Nutanix AHV Virtualization writes "Lightweight, integrates well, and the technical support is responsive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle VM VirtualBox writes "The solution is versatile, simple to use, and stable". Nutanix AHV Virtualization is most compared with Proxmox VE, VMware vSphere, Hyper-V, KVM and RHEV, whereas Oracle VM VirtualBox is most compared with Proxmox VE, KVM, Hyper-V, Oracle VM and IBM PowerVM. See our Nutanix AHV Virtualization vs. Oracle VM VirtualBox 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.