We performed a comparison between KVM and Nutanix AHV based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below
Comparison Results: KVM has a slight edge in this comparison. It received higher marks for its user interface than Nutanix AHV did.
"KVM is stable."
"I appreciate the network passcode feature in KVM, as it provides a convenient way to manage DNS and cloud hosting."
"The most valuable feature of KVM is its stability."
"I like that this is an open-source solution. It is very powerful, and it's easy."
"The key aspect is that the KVM directly interacts with the Kronos. There's no clear indication of indirect communication with Kronos. It is not linked to Kronos, and interaction is straightforward without any intermediaries."
"I have found KVM to be scalable."
"The most valuable feature is hypervisor. I can host at the same time different operating systems in Linux Windows."
"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."
"It is a stable solution. I haven't faced stability issues in the solution."
"The initial setup of Nutanix AHV Virtualization is straightforward."
"This product stands out for its user-friendly interface, intuitive design, and responsive UI. It offers AVH features comparable to Nutanix but at a more cost-effective price point."
"Integration is the most valuable feature of the product."
"You don't need any other instruments for control, AHV. You only need to look at the prism to control all infrastructure."
"Nutanix AHV works really well. It's much easier to administer and manage than VMware. Since we're not a large IT department within the finance sector, our team is relatively small. We don't have a huge team of IT professionals to manage all the other systems."
"It has a vs switch for the people who know Linux, in case it's easier for them to use AHV than it is to use VMware."
"Nutanix AHV is very scalable. It can go to unlimited nodes."
"The KVM tech support is really bad. They are not very responsive."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved and made more user-friendly."
"I would like to see more focus on microservices and integration with Kubernetes or OpenShift."
"Business continuity features need to be added."
"The solution should be more user friendly. We are struggling with the command lines."
"KVM is very difficult to manage and run on daily operations."
"The stability of this solution is less than other products in the same category."
"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."
"VMware does tend to have more features than AHV. It's more of the leader in this space."
"In terms of improvement, I think that they could have more partnerships with providers."
"The integration capabilities of Nutanix AHV Virtualization is an area with certain shortcomings that need improvement."
"It would be better if the solution's replication to another site could be efficiently optimized."
"If you have the need for special hardware like FibreChannel-Cards or such and there is no networked-way around it (such as you could work with USB Dongles via an HW-Dongle-Server of network), you have to use a separate hypervisor."
"The initial installation is complex. It took approximately four days."
"The software based controller has high consumption. This could be improved."
"There is room for improvement in the USB mapping."
KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 39 reviews while Nutanix AHV Virtualization is ranked 6th in Server Virtualization Software with 48 reviews. KVM is rated 8.0, while Nutanix AHV Virtualization 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 AHV Virtualization writes "Lightweight, integrates well, and the technical support is responsive". KVM is most compared with Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere and RHEV, whereas Nutanix AHV Virtualization is most compared with Proxmox VE, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere, Citrix Hypervisor and RHEV. See our KVM vs. Nutanix AHV Virtualization 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.