We performed a comparison between KVM and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Proxmox, VMware, Microsoft and others in Server Virtualization Software."A very reliable solution which can be used for x86 architecture virtualization with reasonable overhead."
"It offers a high-availability environment."
"If you prefer command-line, there are all kinds of command-line options."
"What I like most about KVM is that it's very easy to use. Everything is built-in, even when writing command lines."
"The initial setup was simple."
"Very cost-effective."
"The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before."
"I like that this is an open-source solution. It is very powerful, and it's easy."
"This is a very flexible solution that you are able to run however you want."
"The most valuable features are easy cloud administration and management."
"The most valuable features are simple management and one-click upgrades."
"Karbon is a must-have as it drastically simplifies the deployment of Kubernetes."
"Great flexibility and scalability."
"Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure's most valuable feature is the flexibility to move the VMs easily, keeping everything together."
"There are a lot of things I really like. Perhaps the best part is taking a snapshot of a virtual machine. It's very quick. Another useful part is replication and creating a protection domain: using the protection feature to replicate a machine to a remote site for DR purposes."
"Acropolis' main advantages are high performance and availability."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"The stability of this solution is less than other products in the same category."
"Some things are pretty basic, and they could be more robust with more detail."
"We still occasionally build Interlaced Wireless Protection within our environment. The ecosystem entails areas, where we support agents, and release backup and security solutions. Collaboration with independent software vendors (ITOLs or ITOLED) is necessary to offer these solutions to customers. However, the scope of the ecosystem in KVM is not as extensive as that of VMware's. In contrast, VMware boasts a robust partner network, allowing for comprehensive customer solutions. On the other hand, KVM’s ecosystem is comparatively limited in comparison. I would like to see FT features in KVM."
"Support for VF is needed, where you can, for example, export from VMware to KVM."
"The grid interface of KVM needs improvement. It could be more beautiful, especially when compared to VMware."
"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."
"Its resource usage can be improved."
"The software-defined networking should be improved. It is quite substandard as compared to the VMware variant. The software-defined networking is quite limited, and we usually use other products to do that. We're aware that Nutanix is working on that and will be coming out with better solutions, and we can't wait because to do a fully software-defined architecture, the abstraction layer needs not only software-defined storage, which you have, but also the software-defined networking piece."
"In the future, I would like Acropolis to add support for publishing external storage."
"With some projects that we are deploying, there are errors that arise when adding nodes."
"The GUI of Nutanix Acropolis AOS could be improved that can be done from the OEM side. It's a very basic stable web browser that they're using. It is not very inclusive."
"The product requires a lot of resources."
"Nutanix could streamline Acropolis' advanced management to keep pace with its competitors. For example, in VMware vSphere ESXi Hypervisor, you can directly put a host into maintenance mode via the GUI. However, it takes several steps to do this with Nutanix Acropolis, and you need to use the command-line interface for most of the steps."
"I'm not very technical, so I don't know if there are any features that are really lacking. Our customers seem pleased with it, and I haven't heard of any downsides."
"The One-Click Upgrade process could/should offer the ability to integrate with 3rd party drivers. For example, we use NVIDIA Grid graphics cards. It would be amazing if, during the One-Click Upgrade process, we could "slipstream" additional VIB drivers for ESXi into the upgrade process."
More Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) Pricing and Cost Advice →
KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 39 reviews while Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) is ranked 3rd in HCI with 194 reviews. KVM is rated 8.0, while Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of KVM writes "Delivers good performance because of kernel-based virtualization". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) writes "A powerful solution with easy deployment, upgrades, and management". KVM is most compared with Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere and Oracle Linux, whereas Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) is most compared with VxRail, VMware vSAN, VMware vSphere, Dell PowerFlex and Hyper-V.
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.