Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Citrix XenServer vs KVM vs Oracle VM VirtualBox comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.8
Citrix XenServer offers cost savings and enhanced efficiency through virtualization, justifying the investment despite higher initial costs.
Sentiment score
8.5
KVM users save $20,000 monthly due to its open-source nature, eliminating license fees and offering cost-effective virtualization.
Sentiment score
5.3
Oracle VM VirtualBox offers quick ROI by reducing costs and streamlining processes, with users reporting high satisfaction and time savings.
My clients generally maintain their Citrix infrastructure without shifting, suggesting stability and reliable operation as Citrix XenServer is fully established.
KVM definitely saves costs since it is open-source and does not obligate us to pay for licenses as necessary with other virtualization solutions.
I did not perform any long-term stress tests, just for a couple of hours or days on every application.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
4.8
Citrix XenServer's customer service varies in effectiveness, with challenges in response times and support access, especially for complex issues.
Sentiment score
8.7
KVM relies on community support; effectiveness varies, with some preferring paid options like Red Hat for dedicated assistance.
Sentiment score
7.7
VirtualBox users prefer online documentation and community support over Oracle's support, which is seen as capable but slow.
With valid licenses, we can access hotfixes, service packs, knowledge base, self-help tools, diagnostics, downloads, live chat, and phone support.
They do not provide adequate support for midsize businesses.
There appear to be very few engineers at Citrix who understand the problems.
Paid support is also obtainable from companies like Red Hat for more critical issues.
Their forum and documentation is more than enough for technical support.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.9
Citrix XenServer offers effective scalability and integration, appreciated for its ease, cost-effectiveness, and support for enterprise growth.
Sentiment score
7.7
KVM offers high scalability for enterprise environments, leveraging Linux kernel architecture, though rapid expansion may challenge larger companies.
Sentiment score
7.2
Oracle VM VirtualBox is valued for scalable environments, though hardware limitations and memory overhead can impede performance.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Citrix XenServer is reliable for SMBs, supports high uptimes, but may occasionally face minor issues, especially with backups.
Sentiment score
7.8
KVM is generally stable and reliable, though occasional issues arise during I/O tasks or hardware changes, requiring careful handling.
Sentiment score
7.1
Oracle VM VirtualBox is generally stable but faces occasional issues, especially on Windows, rated around eight for stability.
The snapshot functionality in Oracle VM VirtualBox is effective for management purposes.
 

Room For Improvement

Citrix XenServer needs better backup, integration, management, stability, compatibility, affordability, technical support, community engagement, and marketing.
KVM needs user interface improvements, better networking, enhanced tools, platform compatibility, optimized resources, and improved support and documentation.
Oracle VM VirtualBox users desire better networking, stability, resource management, and enhanced integration with diverse hardware and remote solutions.
We can implement high availability and live migration with pools, along with security and backup to enable role-based access control for safer management.
Although the product is technically competitive, it is not widely known or used due to poor marketing.
Citrix needs to improve the hypervisor, specifically in security and performance.
In comparison to VMware, which offers a more balanced set of management features, KVM could improve in terms of user-friendly tooling.
Having some kind of API to maintain Oracle VM VirtualBox would be beneficial.
 

Setup Cost

Citrix XenServer is a cost-effective alternative to VMware, though pricing can be complex and varies with needs.
KVM is a cost-effective, open-source virtualization platform often preferred over VMware, with affordable support options enhancing its appeal.
Oracle VM VirtualBox provides a free version popular for cost-effectiveness, with enterprise licensing seen as expensive by some.
If you are using Citrix load only, then it's free, resulting in significant cost savings for organizations.
It is cheaper compared to its competitors.
The pricing is considered not expensive.
Compared to VMware and Microsoft, KVM offers better pricing and licensing options.
In the enterprise scenario, all software solutions, including Oracle VM VirtualBox, are expensive.
 

Valuable Features

Citrix XenServer offers virtualization, ease of use, scalability, and strong support, ideal for small to medium businesses.
KVM excels in performance, scalability, ease of management, and security, offering seamless Linux integration and cost-effective virtualization.
Oracle VM VirtualBox is free, versatile, and easy to use, ideal for testing, education, and stable multi-platform virtualization.
The most valuable feature is transferring and sharing applications that allow users to move files between devices, including smartphones, tablets, and computers without needing USB cables, internet connections, or data usage.
It provides secure access to applications and resources, which is crucial for us and our clients.
Generally, Citrix XenServer goes in straightforward vanilla deployment because it is majorly used for Citrix farms.
The most valuable feature of KVM is its superior real-time performance, which results in lower latency compared to alternatives like VMware and Microsoft.
The guest OS compatibility was tremendous because I used Oracle VM VirtualBox on Linux and ran Windows applications on top of that, working seamlessly.
Its snapshot functionality helps with backup management.
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Server Virtualization Software category, the mindshare of Citrix XenServer is 4.9%, up from 4.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of KVM is 10.1%, down from 11.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle VM VirtualBox is 6.3%, down from 9.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Server Virtualization Software
 

Featured Reviews

VivekKumar10 - PeerSpot reviewer
Cost efficiency enables significant savings but improvement in support and backup integration is needed for enhanced reliability
In the past, we utilized the live migration feature in Citrix XenServer, but not in this project. This is a new, fresh deployment, so there is no live migration. The support of heterogeneous resource pool in Citrix XenServer depends on the deployment and customer requirements. If a customer requires heterogeneous deployment, we accommodate that. Generally, Citrix XenServer goes in straightforward vanilla deployment because it is majorly used for Citrix farms. Very few customers use it for other products or applications. Intelligent performance optimization is available in this product, but very few customers use it, and those who do aren't using it extensively. I cannot comment extensively on this feature at present.
Lan Tuong - PeerSpot reviewer
Useful to manage the virtual environments
The most valuable features of KVM for us are the console, which allows us to build or clone VMs quickly, and the ability to take snapshots and recreate new VMs rapidly. That's one of the things we love about KVM. The built-in management console, Auto KVM, is the most valuable tool for managing our virtual environments. We use it most to create and fire up new VMs or clone them for customers based on requests. The migration tools have worked quite well for us. We're moving from an Oracle Solaris platform for KVM logical domains, upgrading, and using KVM from Red Hat. It's slightly different but very similar to Oracle Unbreakable Linux, which is basically a clone of Red Hat. Oracle's console is easier to use than Red Hat's, though.
Tanvir Siddique - PeerSpot reviewer
Easily accesses open solutions with seamless compatibility for testing and development
The most valuable feature is the seamlessness. When I install a Linux operating system, I can use Windows applications through Oracle VM VirtualBox seamlessly. There are many applications that work only on Windows. For desktop testing purposes, I used Oracle VM VirtualBox, and it works fine. The guest OS compatibility was tremendous because I used Oracle VM VirtualBox on Linux and ran Windows applications on top of that, working seamlessly.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Virtualization Software solutions are best for your needs.
861,803 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VL
Jan 13, 2015
vSphere vs. RHEV vs. Hyper-V vs. XenServer
We have used the following functions: 1. Hypervisor: to ensure that the virtual server provide web and email services to the company, thus providing a stable operation a with single sign-on integration of an AD server and vCenter. 2. Network and Storage: centralized data server…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
16%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Educational Organization
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Citrix Hypervisor?
The core function enables multiple virtual machines to run on a single physical server. This maximizes hardware utili...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Citrix Hypervisor?
Licensing with Citrix XenServer is very cost-effective. Organizations save substantial money because competing soluti...
What needs improvement with Citrix Hypervisor?
In a DC, DR situation, if applications are self-dependent and self-DR replicated, then it works fine. However, if hyp...
Why KVM??? Help please!
KVM scales better, orchestration better, performs better and supports a wider range of hardware and, also, you can im...
Why KVM??? Help please!
Small support team, small cluster, low core count, use VMware products Large support team, large clusters with many c...
Why KVM??? Help please!
Far from being an expert, my opinion is that the positive sides of KVM are: Lower costs and open-source which gives ...
How does KVM compare to Oracle VM VirtualBox?
KVM is easy to use, stable and flexible. It is mature and very fast. It is an affordable open-source solution that is...
What do you like most about Oracle VM VirtualBox?
The product’s most valuable feature is the ability to manage multiple operating systems through one application.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Oracle VM VirtualBox?
Maintenance is not necessary because I did not use it for heavy loads.
 

Also Known As

Hypervisor
No data available
No data available
 

Overview

 

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
Airbus, Colorado State University, SCS Africa, Wolf Medical Systems.
Find out what your peers are saying about Proxmox, VMware, Microsoft and others in Server Virtualization Software. Updated: July 2025.
861,803 professionals have used our research since 2012.