No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

KVM vs RHEV comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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
8th
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
6.3
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Server Virtualization Software category, the mindshare of KVM is 7.0%, down from 10.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RHEV is 2.4%, down from 3.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Server Virtualization Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
KVM7.0%
RHEV2.4%
Other90.6%
Server Virtualization Software
 

Featured Reviews

BB
Chief Technology Officer at a manufacturing company with 11-50 employees
Low latency in mission-critical environments with different virtualization environments
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 ability to switch from one VM to another efficiently, thanks to the implementation of a real-time kernel, ensures delays remain minimal, thereby meeting our organization's performance requirements. This improved latency is critical because any delay in voice transmission could lead to life-threatening situations. Additionally, KVM being open-source means that we are not obligated to pay for licenses, which significantly reduces costs and simplifies license handling for ourselves and on behalf of customers.
Mike Neuliep - PeerSpot reviewer
Linux Systems Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Has supported virtualization projects in side jobs but has required workarounds due to lack of maintenance
In my opinion, the best features of RHEV are that it is a real hypervisor and it is free, so it performs better than VMware. I have used the live migration feature in the past with RHEV. There is a free clone of it that is based on the open source. Live migration is a nifty feature if your app is not highly available and you need to do maintenance on a machine. You can migrate the VM off of it, do your maintenance, and move it back when you are done. RHEV has a high availability architecture with a built-in monitoring feature where you could see machines other than the one you are operating on. I tend to implement high availability not so much in RHEV, but by using standard application high availability strategies. Red Hat has another product specifically for high availability.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"If you prefer command-line, there are all kinds of command-line options."
"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."
"KVM, as a native virtualization solution, is a complete and fully adequate system for small businesses that need to reduce costs, and also to make maintenance easier."
"KVM is very complete, it is very powerful, but people are used to graphical QEMU and that is an issue."
"KVM is stable."
"KVM has benefited our organization by enabling us to assess different virtualization solutions with reduced latency, which is crucial for guaranteeing the reliability and real-time performance of our communication systems."
"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."
"I find the density of the product most valuable, because kernel same page merging technology (KSM) that is integrated into the Linux kernel makes KVM one of the important players of the virtualization market."
"For any application that requires 100% uptime, 100% of data accessibility, I use these servers."
"It's a very good platform to build your virtual machines on and highly integrated with Red Hat itself and its satellites."
"It is easy to deal with when comes to application migration and its compatibility with the multiple component applications."
"We find the ease of use of this solution to be invaluable, as it is user-friendly and integrates well with other software."
"The solution has a good licensing module."
"It is very stable."
"The solution is a great all-round product, and the virtualization is especially good."
"The most valuable features of RHEV are all the tools, such as virtualization, management of cloud platforms, and integration of container environments. The solution has good compatibility between virtualization, content management, and cloud management. Having the full set of these tools is the advantage of it."
 

Cons

"I am sorry to say that online propaganda made believe that KVM is a mature product that should be considered for production. I think KVM may be good for a lab where the VMs aren't critical."
"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."
"The networking with wireless devices needs improvement."
"Setting KVM up and running it with dozens of parameters can be annoying."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"Its resource usage can be improved."
"The main drawback in the solution is probably disaster recovery."
"The initial setup of this solution is more difficult than some of the competing products and it could be improved."
"We should improve how we manage storage domains and make more comprehensive control available through the command line."
"A few features of the product do not work as well as those in VMware."
"With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected."
"I heard that there are big differences between Red Hat eight and seven, but it's still quite difficult for me to judge it. I found it a bit more difficult to manage than version seven, which was much easier. In term of features, though, it is still not yet clear which is better. I have no clear idea of which features need to be changed at the moment."
"My teammates and I often complain that VMware is well-documented and has a large community since it is the de facto standard. I would love to see better documentation and ease of use."
"Specifically, enhancements in managing virtual machine migrations, cloning, and the creation of different VMs could further optimize its functionality."
"Configuring the network interfaces is much better in Ubuntu and should be improved."
"We would like the dashboard feature of this solution to be improved, as it is not very detailed at present."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is fair compared to others. But in our local market, it's a problem to get budget approval from management. That's why they are trying to get those products so we can give them the price benefit. But if you consider the international market or other products, it's sometimes better than their price."
"The tool is free."
"We had some problems with the licensing."
"It is cheaper than other solutions out there on the market."
"I have no information on the cost of KVM because I downloaded it for the lab and not for production. It's free, but I don't know if that's the case for people using it in a production environment."
"KVM is free."
"It is free for everyone."
"I use KVM for free through Proxmox, which offers a free license alternative."
"This is an open-source solution."
"We buy a license for commercial use, and we also use the free editions."
"I would say the price is acceptable."
"Its price depends on the use cases."
"RHEV offers pricing based on a per-physical-machine licensing model."
"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."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Virtualization Software solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VL
CIO at Robusta Technology & Training
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
12%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise12
 

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 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?
RHEV is not improving because it has been discontinued. It has been discontinued for years. I would love to get back into RHEV, but the job market is difficult and no one is hiring. RHEV is designe...
What is your primary use case for RHEV?
I have done some consulting where I used RHEV, taking on side jobs to run virtual machines in the financial industry for a startup. The last time I used RHEV was in my home lab, but that has been d...
 

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: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.