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.
"Scaling the solution is easy. You just have to add more hardware."
"There is a strong emphasis on availability, and they have numerous API interfaces for distributed storage and the solution is quite known for its openness."
"Our production servers are running in Linux, and this solution supports that environment well."
"I like that this is an open-source solution. It is very powerful, and it's easy."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"It is an open ecosystem, and we see there is a benefit in open-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."
"I appreciate the network passcode feature in KVM, as it provides a convenient way to manage DNS and cloud hosting."
"Because of the virtualization for Linux, I use just Linux basically in all VMs, a few with Windows."
"Its technical support is quite good."
"It is very useful for the project management of our company."
"The ability to live migrate VMs on the fly from one hypervisor to another has been very useful."
"The solution is very stable. I don't recall any bugs or glitches. It's reliable. It doesn't crash or freeze."
"It provides enhancements for network and storage configuration, policy-based management for delivering application resource flexibility, and a GUI."
"The virtualization product Oracle puts out just complements the performance of the database."
"I rate Oracle VM's scalability a ten out of ten."
"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 grid interface of KVM needs improvement. It could be more beautiful, especially when compared to VMware."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"The stability of this solution is less than other products in the same category."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved and made more user-friendly."
"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."
"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."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"The solution is an outdated Xen-based application."
"One is the hypervisor. Right now, it’s all using Xen. What would be really helpful is to have some choice, and the underlying hypervisor technology use KVM which is very popular with certain workloads."
"Oracle VM is not very stable. When you encounter any issue, it's unclear what is happening."
"I would like to be able to ship all of our logs. This feature could exist and I am just not aware of it."
"The performance could be better because I need to purchase a lot of CPUs to perform in the workbench."
"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."
"I would say third-party plugins to other storage vendors. There are a lot of converged infrastructure setups; one that we have, multiple different hardware vendors. So that would be something we could definitely be looking for."
"Incorporating analytics related to performance, particularly within the dashboard interface, would be beneficial."
KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 39 reviews while Oracle VM is ranked 7th in Server Virtualization Software with 78 reviews. KVM is rated 8.0, while Oracle VM is rated 8.0. 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.