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.
"Our production servers are running in Linux, and this solution supports that environment well."
"It is easy to use, stable, and flexible. It is a pretty mature product, and it is faster than VirtualBox."
"I appreciate the network passcode feature in KVM, as it provides a convenient way to manage DNS and cloud hosting."
"It is an open ecosystem, and we see there is a benefit in open-source solutions."
"I like that this is an open-source solution. It is very powerful, and it's easy."
"Good screen and keyboard sharing feature."
"Documentation and problem-solving troubleshooting are the most valuable features. Performance (when fine-tuned and with "special" HW) is awesome, equal to or more than other enterprise closed-source solutions."
"The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before."
"The biggest advantage of Oracle VM is that you can separate your clusters to get your licenses agreement in scope."
"In terms of server provisioning, it only takes a few clicks of a button and a bit of install automation."
"It's not a very expensive product."
"Ability to patch with no downtime."
"Its technical support is quite good."
"The Foundation is the most valuable feature of Oracle VM."
"What I like best about this product is that it's free."
"Its ease of management and simplicity are most valuable. It is free, and you can provision an unlimited number of VMs at no cost for clients. They also provide perfect support."
"The speed is around thirty percent slower than another competitor. This would be something to work on."
"The product must provide better performance monitoring features."
"One problem I have is that it's not very scalable when it comes to resizing the VM disk dimensions. For example, if you have initially set a virtual drive to 10 GB and you want to upgrade it to 15 GB, it's not that easy."
"The solution should be more user friendly. We are struggling with the command lines."
"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."
"The only negative aspect of needing hardware support is a fully functional KVM can be dropped. It would be nice if the support for other platforms, like ARM or Risk, were as good as the x86 one. However, with the democratization of Chromebooks based on these chips and mobile devices, it will not take long for that to happen."
"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."
"The KVM tech support is really bad. They are not very responsive."
"Oracle VM should be more feature-rich."
"There are issues with the solution's stability since it crashes."
"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."
"There are currently issues with centralized storage."
"If there are issues with the storage, then all the machines go down, even if I have a backup solution in place."
"The documentation for implementation could be improved because we were not able to find an easy way to implement our company's features due to a lack of understanding."
"The performance could be better because I need to purchase a lot of CPUs to perform in the workbench."
"Oracle VM could provide integration with backup solutions."
KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 39 reviews while Oracle VM is ranked 7th in Server Virtualization Software with 76 reviews. KVM is rated 8.0, while Oracle VM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of KVM writes "Delivers good performance because of kernel-based virtualization". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle VM writes "A cheap option available for Linux environments which is useful for many workloads". 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.
