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.
"The performance is great."
"The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before."
"The KVM service is well managed with a central policy interface."
"It offers a high-availability environment."
"What I like most about KVM is that it's very easy to use. Everything is built-in, even when writing command lines."
"One of the best features of KVM is its user-friendly interface."
"The most valuable feature of KVM is its stability."
"I find the density of the product most valuable. It is density that a technologist can just assign page merging. This is what makes KVM one of the important players of the virtualization market."
"I don't need to create a repository to allocate storage to my virtual machine, rather I can just use store locally."
"Oracle is probably the best database technology out there. I've never found anything as complete in terms of feature and functionality and sophistication."
"The cloning is a great feature and live migration is very easy."
"The product's initial setup phase was simple."
"The most valuable features of Oracle VM are live migration and snapshots."
"Because of the virtualization for Linux, I use just Linux basically in all VMs, a few with Windows."
"In terms of server provisioning, it only takes a few clicks of a button and a bit of install automation."
"Ability to patch with no downtime."
"Support for VF is needed, where you can, for example, export from VMware to KVM."
"The product must provide better performance monitoring features."
"Some things are pretty basic, and they could be more robust with more detail."
"KVM is very difficult to manage and run on daily operations."
"There are some issues with the graphics and some software that is very complex."
"The initial setup of this solution is more difficult than some of the competing products and it could be improved."
"In KVM, snapshots and cloning are areas where there could be a little more sophistication, like VMware."
"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."
"The only improvement needed for Oracle VM is the look and feel of the interface."
"It doesn't monitor everything, which is a little bit more difficult. It doesn't seem to have as many features or metrics to monitor as some others do, so you have to make some homemade scripts to do it."
"The usage could be easier, and more user-friendly."
"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."
"The management can be improved more, and become more agile. It would be nice for it to become more rich in terms of UI. In addition, the replication to disaster recovery needs improvement."
"An expanded data transfer option is one of the features I would like to have added."
"There are issues with the solution's stability since it crashes."
"The user interface of the version that we have requires improvement. They have already improved the user interface in the latest version, but we are yet to migrate to that. The new UI is much better. I would like it to be simple. It is serving all of our needs, and I don't think it is necessary to keep adding. We are able to provision a VM in ten minutes, and provisioning it in five minutes will not have any added benefit."
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.