KVM vs RHEV comparison

Why PeerSpot?

KVM and Red Hat are both solutions in the Server Virtualization Software category. KVM is ranked #10 with an average rating of 8.0, while Red Hat is ranked #13 with an average rating of 8.0. KVM holds a 6.6% mindshare in SVS, compared to Red Hat’s 2.5% mindshare. Additionally, 90% of KVM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 80% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

KVM

Read 43 KVM reviews

10,598 Views
9,432 Comparison Views

90% willing to recommend

RHEV

Read 37 RHEV reviews

4,198 Views
4,156 Comparison Views

80% willing to recommend

KVM

RHEV

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

RHEV and KVM are competing products in the virtualization market. KVM seems to have an advantage with its scalability and flexibility, making it a strong contender for businesses with complex requirements.

Features: RHEV offers centralized management, enhanced security options, and robust enterprise-level capabilities. KVM provides an open-source nature, extensibility, and compatibility with various platforms, offering greater customization options.

Room for Improvement: RHEV could benefit from improved third-party tool integrations, less complexity in setup for non-Red Hat environments, and more user-friendly documentation. KVM may improve by providing dedicated customer support, enhancing ease of deployment without requiring extensive expertise, and streamlining its interface.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: RHEV boasts a streamlined deployment model for Red Hat environments and benefits from Red Hat's support. KVM, while offering broader integration possibilities, has a more technical deployment process and relies on community support.

Pricing and ROI: RHEV features a predictable pricing structure suitable for enterprises in the Red Hat ecosystem, with ROI influenced by stable integrations and premium support. KVM offers lower initial setup costs, appealing to budget-conscious organizations, though long-term ROI may depend on additional expertise costs and integration complexities.

To learn more, read our detailed KVM vs. RHEV Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

KVM vs. RHEV

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 917,403 peers since 2012

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

10th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

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

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Server Virtualization Software category, the mindshare of KVM is 6.6%, down from 9.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RHEV is 2.5%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Server Virtualization Software Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
KVM	6.6%
RHEV	2.5%
Other	90.9%

Server Virtualization Software

Featured Reviews

Reviewer836542

Chief Technology Officer at Rohill

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.

Read full review

Mike Neuliep

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"KVM is a very good solution for the user ecosystem."

"On the other hand Vmware workstation is a Type 2 hypervisor meaning that this software is going to interact with the host without really modifying it."

"It is easy to use, stable, and flexible. It is a pretty mature product, and it is faster than VirtualBox."

"The product is scalable."

"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."

"It is an easily scalable solution."

"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 appreciate the network passcode feature in KVM, as it provides a convenient way to manage DNS and cloud hosting."

More KVM pros

"Stability and speed are the most valuable aspects."

"They are so advanced today and so mature in what they do that they could easily give any top-notch industry leaders a run for their money."

"What they provide is way beyond the essential requirements of customers."

"When any organization needs end-to-end infrastructure deployment, configuration management, and automation, then RHEV is the best fit."

"Performance and security are key advantages of RHEV."

"RHEV’s cost is much less compared to VMware."

"The solution is stable, there are no bugs or glitches, it doesn't crash or freeze, and it's reliable with good performance."

"It is very stable."

More RHEV pros

Cons

"The KVM tech support is really bad. They are not very responsive."

"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."

"Their support for snapshot and revert could be improved."

"Technical support could be better. In the next release, I would like to see an improved user interface and dashboard. This type of improvement will make it easy or help our engineers understand the solution from a requirement point of view."

"The only negative aspect of needing hardware support is a fully functional KVM can be dropped."

"The solution’s user interface could be improved and made more user-friendly."

"I do not recommend this product for those looking for a stable and scalable virtualization solution because they will ultimately have problems in their data center."

"We are not getting good support from KVM, and it is not that user-friendly."

More KVM cons

"A few features of the product do not work as well as those in VMware."

"We have found the technical support for this solution to be very slow in responding to our requests for assistance."

"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."

"Scalability depends on the applications. Red Hat by itself is not scalable."

"This solution could be more secure."

"With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected."

"The Administration of the Oracle database and the SAP ERP needs improvement."

"You need to buy support from red hat and you need to renew support every year in order to keep getting support from red hat."

More RHEV cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product's pricing is above average but cheaper than that of VMware. I can't provide specific licensing costs, but we have a contract with Red Hat for client support that covers everything. There are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fees."

"KVM is priced reasonably."

"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."

"It is cheaper than other solutions out there on the market."

"This solution is an open-source, free platform with paid support."

"This solution came with the Linux license."

"There is no cost involved in the use of KVM, as it is open source."

"KVM is free."

More KVM pricing and cost advice

"We have to pay extra for vulnerability and fault tolerance."

"This is an open-source solution."

"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."

"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."

"Its price depends on the use cases."

"I would say the price is acceptable."

"I believe we pay on a yearly basis."

"Price-wise, RHEV is okay, in my opinion."

More RHEV pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Virtualization Software solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

917,403 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Comparison Review

Thang Le Toan (Victory Lee)

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…

Read full review

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Outsourcing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	22
Midsize Enterprise	9
Large Enterprise	14

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	21
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	12

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Hyper-V vs KVM

Compared 21% of the time

Oracle VM VirtualBox vs KVM

Compared 12% of the time

VMware vSphere vs KVM

Compared 10% of the time

VMware Workstation vs KVM

Compared 9% of the time

XCP-ng virtualization platform vs KVM

Compared 3% of the time

More KVM Competitors

Hyper-V vs RHEV

Compared 19% of the time

VMware vSphere vs RHEV

Compared 16% of the time

Proxmox VE vs RHEV

Compared 13% of the time

Oracle VM vs RHEV

Compared 9% of the time

DxEnterprise vs RHEV

Compared 6% of the time

More RHEV Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

KVM

October 2026

Download KVM product report

Buyer's Guide

RHEV

October 2026

Download RHEV product report

Also Known As

No data available

Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization

Overview

KVM is an open-source virtualization technology providing seamless management, high performance, and cost-effective solutions. Known for its flexibility and easy integration with Linux, KVM supports multithreading and embedded systems, ensuring robust real-time performance across environments.

As a comprehensive virtualization tool, KVM offers efficient virtual machine management and deployment of virtual network functions. Its easy configuration and stable user experience make it ideal for applications spanning data centers to cloud services. While KVM excels in core functionalities, improvements in user-friendliness, documentation, and integration with technologies like Kubernetes and mobile platforms could enhance its usability. Networking capabilities, disaster recovery, and backup functionalities also present areas for development, along with further graphical interface enhancements and technical support improvements. Despite these growth opportunities, KVM remains a preferred choice across industries seeking cost reduction and reliable virtualization operations.

What are KVM's key features?

Open-source: Community-driven, free to use
Easy management: User-centric configuration process
Excellent performance: Optimized for diverse environments
Cost-effectiveness: Reduces expenses in virtualization
Linux integration: Seamless with Linux systems
Live migrations: Minimal disruption during migrations
Real-time kernel: Ensures low latency operations
Multithreading support: Efficient concurrent processing
High-density data management: Manages vast data effectively
Community support: Strong forums for user assistance

What benefits should users look for?

Cost reduction: Saves by cutting operating expenses
Scalability: Adapts to growing infrastructure needs
Stability: Reliable operations across tasks
Integration ease: Works well with existing systems
Performance: Delivers high-speed, stable processing

Industries like finance, healthcare, and manufacturing implement KVM to drive down costs and streamline virtual server deployment. Used extensively in data centers and for hosting cloud services, KVM also aids in testing and production system environments. Organizations benefit from efficient cluster management and backup solutions for reliable operations across a variety of applications.

KVM

RHEV offers a cost-effective virtualization platform with support for up to 160 cores and 2 TB of RAM per host, emphasizing open-source accessibility and integration with applications like OpenStack.

RHEV stands out with features such as high performance, stability, ease of migration, and robust security. Its integration capabilities with diverse applications and the self-service Power user portal enhance its appeal for IT environments. While the platform's affordability compared to VMware is noted, areas for improvement include the GUI, user-friendliness, network virtualization, and the need for enhanced pricing and support in regions lacking system integrators. RHEV's ability to facilitate seamless migration from legacy systems to virtual environments is widely adopted in sectors such as government, banking, and IT services.

What are the key features of RHEV?

Open-Source Accessibility: Offers flexibility and customization options.
High Performance: Supports up to 160 cores and 2 TB of RAM per host.
Seamless Integration: Integrates well with applications like OpenStack.
Live VM Migration: Enables continuous operations without downtime.
Power User Portal: Provides self-service capabilities for users.

What benefits and ROI can users expect?

Cost Optimization: Provides a cost-effective alternative to VMware.
Scalable Computing: Allows flexible resource allocation and scaling.
Migration Efficiency: Facilitates moving from legacy systems smoothly.
Robust Security: Enhances data protection and privacy management.

RHEV is widely used in high-computing tasks like AI and big data analytics within data centers, supporting cloud solutions, AI, and ERP systems. It's implemented in privacy clouds for industries such as government, banking, and IT services to migrate workloads from physical to virtual environments and optimize operational costs.

Red Hat

Sample Customers

MediaWiki, Wikimedia Foundation, Wikipedia, Wikivoyage, Wikidata, Wikiversity, Commons

Qualcomm and Bonham's Auction House.

Buyer's Guide

KVM vs. RHEV

September 2026

Free Report: KVM vs. RHEV

Find out what your peers are saying about KVM vs. RHEV and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

917,403 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our KVM vs. RHEV 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.