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

Citrix XenServer vs RHEV comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 17, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Citrix XenServer
Ranking in Server Virtualization Software
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
RHEV
Ranking in Server Virtualization Software
13th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Server Virtualization Software category, the mindshare of Citrix XenServer is 4.8%, up from 4.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RHEV is 2.9%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Server Virtualization Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Citrix XenServer4.8%
RHEV2.9%
Other92.3%
Server Virtualization Software
 

Featured Reviews

Jörg Köhler - PeerSpot reviewer
Consulting benefits from robust consulting while also recognizing the need for improved disk management
When it comes to optimization, that's one of the weaker points of Citrix XenServer, especially regarding disk management, which is somewhat clumsy. Backup-related issues and disk management should be improved. Especially concerning backup, as discussions with Veeam engineers about Citrix XenServer backup strategy indicate there might not be a solution from Veeam soon. License optimization is not such a significant problem, but licenses are quite complicated. Vendors constantly invent new license models, making it difficult to order the correct licenses needed. There is not a big difference between Citrix and VMware products because Citrix can implement Windows and Linux anyway.
Sujeet-Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
The solution is scalable and affordable, but it lacks features, and it is not easy to manage
Management of RHEV is not as easy as VMware. Some features do not work. The product does not provide features similar to VMware’s VMotion. After creating the cluster, the VM is moved to another node if we move down. However, the VM does not move the parent node automatically. It has to be moved manually. VMware moves it automatically. RHEV moves it to the parent node only if we restart. Everything can be handled in VMware through the GUI. However, in RHEV, some things can be managed through UI, and others cannot. We have to troubleshoot and use CLI. A few features of the product do not work as well as those in VMware.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The onboarding process is pretty straightforward."
"This solution allows the end users to clone, start, stop, or remotely control their VMs."
"It is user-friendly and easy to deploy, making it an attractive option."
"I find Citrix XenServer valuable for its affordable server virtualization capabilities."
"The solution is extremely user friendly."
"There's no complexity in using the tool, especially with the VBI integration. It works very well and has proven to be a stable platform. I have experienced attacks, such as ransomware, but my Citrix Hypervisor virtual machines were protected. This is due to its hardened operating system and DNS, which successfully protected the virtual machines on that platform."
"The initial setup is easy."
"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."
"When you purchase RHEV, you are essentially buying a subscription license. This license can be integrated with various client types, including these integrations with the subscription."
"Stability and speed are the most valuable aspects."
"I advise keeping an open mind. It's an excellent solution."
"It is very stable."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support portal."
"There aren't any bugs on the solution."
"It is easy to deal with when comes to application migration and its compatibility with the multiple component applications."
"The solution is stable."
 

Cons

"The solution needs better backup facilities that are available for virtual machines to create servers on."
"The built-in networking features are a little limited."
"Citrix Hypervisor is expensive if you get it as a stand-alone product, so this is one area for improvement. Its price could be cheaper. We also found other areas for improvement in Citrix Hypervisor, for example, we can't use SCIM provisioning, and there are limitations to the size of the HDD. Another area for improvement is the pass-through storage, in particular the removable storage, because that also has limitations where you can't connect to the drive if it is more than one TB."
"The USB support for the virtual server needs improvement."
"You need a licensed account to look up technical support."
"It needs to have a more robust backup solution."
"I did not favor Citrix XenServer in the past due to numerous issues and complications that made it a nightmare to use."
"The licensing costs are too high on the solution. They should work to make the costs more reasonable."
"While everything needs improvement in some way, I have no specifics."
"We'd like it if it would be possible on Red Hat Virtualization to possibly connect two or three VMs to the same disk."
"The support is tricky in a few places. We're facing some challenges within Malaysia where we don't really have the system integrators available who can provide extended support. When we need personnel on-site, we can't get them."
"It lags behind in that you need to go to something like Fedora to get all the extra bells and whistles."
"Red Hat by itself is not scalable. But you can have third party add-ons like Ceph to make it massively scalable."
"The Administration of the Oracle database and the SAP ERP needs improvement."
"I would love to see better documentation and ease of use."
"A few features of the product do not work as well as those in VMware."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Citrix Hypervisor is expensive."
"While it is free for small networks, the pricing is high if your network grows past a certain size."
"To subscribe to the paid version with support, it is approximately $6,000 per year."
"The most valuable feature is the cost; it is a free product."
"Citrix Hypervisor is a licensed product, and customers who buy the Citrix XenDesktop get Citrix Hypervisor for free. If they don't buy the license for Citrix XenDesktop, they'll need to pay for Citrix Hypervisor and its price is high. Pricing is even higher than VMware. The licensing policy for Citrix Hypervisor is good. It's straightforward. The only issue is the price because it's an expensive product."
"We migrated from VMware to XenCenter to cut costs."
"Citrix is a good low-cost alternative to VMware, so if budgeting is an issue then I would recommend it."
"There are three editions available and I believe they are perpetual licenses."
"I would say the price is acceptable."
"It's a budget product as far as I'm concerned. It's way cheaper than any of its competitors. The only thing cheaper than Red Hat is that the people who take the Red Hat code clone it and then self-support it."
"I believe we pay on a yearly basis."
"The solution does not require licencing but a subscription is necessary, which is very affordable."
"We have to pay extra for vulnerability and fault tolerance."
"This is an open-source solution."
"This product has a variety of licensing options available. However, the level of licensing, and therefore the cost of licensing, is dependent on the number of servers being utilized."
"The price of RHEV is high. It is an open-source solution, the price should be less. The price should not be on par with a solution, such as VMware. It's not more or equal to VMware, it's less, but the difference should be more substantial."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Virtualization Software solutions are best for your needs.
872,706 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
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise18
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
 

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 utilization and efficiency.
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 solutions, such as VMware, cost double or triple. If you are using Citrix load only, t...
What needs improvement with Citrix Hypervisor?
There could be improvements in Citrix XenServer, but I cannot think of any at the moment. Overall, we are very happy with it.
What do you like most about RHEV?
The initial setup is fairly straightforward and well-documented. The process is very similar to its competitors. The success of your setup depends on how well you plan.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for RHEV?
It's the open source. There's not much cost. It's very minimal comparably. Compared to what I am paying for VMware, it's negligible.
What needs improvement with RHEV?
The RHEV management plane could be improved, particularly the management interface. Something more similar to a Google, Amazon, or Azure interface might attract people to use its management interfa...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Hypervisor
Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

U.S. Army Shared Services Center, SoftLayer, Educational Services of America, Independent Bank, and SK Telecom.
Qualcomm and Bonham's Auction House.
Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix XenServer vs. RHEV and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
872,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.