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

KVM vs RHEV comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 27, 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

KVM
Ranking in Server Virtualization Software
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
43
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 August 2025, in the Server Virtualization Software category, the mindshare of KVM is 10.0%, down from 11.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RHEV is 3.4%, up from 3.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Server Virtualization Software
 

Featured Reviews

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.
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

"I find the density of the product most valuable. It is density that a technologist can just assign page merging. This is what makes KVM one of the important players of the virtualization market."
"I appreciate the network passcode feature in KVM, as it provides a convenient way to manage DNS and cloud hosting."
"The tool's most valuable feature is backup. The product makes it easy to manage virtual machines. Other tools require third-party applications like VMware and vSphere. However, KVM doesn't require these applications."
"The KVM service is well managed with a central policy interface."
"KVM has a rich options set which can be directly used or via wrappers, such as libvirt."
"The most valuable feature of KVM is its superior real-time performance, which results in lower latency compared to alternatives like VMware and Microsoft."
"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 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."
"The solution is stable."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is the popularity of the OS."
"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."
"The platform is scalable, allowing for the installation of multiple nodes."
"This solution is very stable. Much more so than similar products."
"Red Hat is the most stable system."
"The price is the solution's most valuable aspect. It's much cheaper than, for example, VMware."
"It is a scalable solution."
 

Cons

"We are not getting good support from KVM, and it is not that user-friendly."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"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."
"The stability of this solution is less than other products in the same category."
"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 solution overall is just okay."
"Business continuity features need to be added."
"Although KVM meets our expectations, it can be somewhat fragmented with numerous management tools available, making it difficult to determine which tool to use."
"Customers are not aware of this solution, they can improve by providing more awareness and solution availability."
"The solution should be made more user-friendly."
"This solution could be more secure."
"We should improve how we manage storage domains and make more comprehensive control available through the command line."
"The UI should be more interactive with additional features."
"The biggest improvement would be more third-party direct support for things like backups and provisioning through third-party portals."
"We would like the dashboard feature of this solution to be improved, as it is not very detailed at present."
"While everything needs improvement in some way, I have no specifics."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"KVM is priced reasonably."
"I use KVM for free through Proxmox, which offers a free license alternative."
"It is cheaper than other solutions out there on the market."
"One only needs a subscription to Oracle Linux. So, it's cheaper with Oracle Linux's subscription. It is not very expensive. In short, the solution is open source, and you need only a subscription."
"This solution came with the Linux license."
"KVM is an open-source solution."
"KVM is an open-source product that works well for us."
"This solution is an open-source, free platform with paid support."
"We have to pay extra for vulnerability and fault tolerance."
"We are using the free version of Red Hat."
"RHEV offers pricing based on a per-physical-machine licensing model."
"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."
"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."
"This is an open-source solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Virtualization Software solutions are best for your needs.
865,649 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
16%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Why KVM??? Help please!
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...
Why KVM??? Help please!
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 supp...
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 the abilities to customize it according to the specific needs of each customer.
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

No data available
Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

MediaWiki, Wikimedia Foundation, Wikipedia, Wikivoyage, Wikidata, Wikiversity, Commons
Qualcomm and Bonham's Auction House.
Find out what your peers are saying about KVM vs. RHEV and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.