Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Citrix XenServer vs KVM comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 6, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Citrix XenServer
Ranking in Server Virtualization Software
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
47
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
KVM
Ranking in Server Virtualization Software
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Server Virtualization Software category, the mindshare of Citrix XenServer is 4.9%, up from 3.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of KVM is 11.3%, down from 12.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Server Virtualization Software
 

Featured Reviews

Siva Kuppala - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 29, 2024
Allows us to allocate CPU, memory, storage, and network resources across VMs and minimizes downtime in case of hardware failure or maintenance
It is a scalable product and provides great benefits for virtualization needs. However, there are a few considerations: * Cost: Citrix Hypervisor can be fairly expensive. * Complexity: There's a learning curve, especially for those coming from a Microsoft background. Setting it up and managing it can introduce some complexity. * Hardware Support: Not all major hardware vendors fully support Citrix Hypervisor. * Third-party Integration: Integrating Hypervisor with other technologies within a large ecosystem can sometimes be challenging. * Community Support: Compared to solutions like Microsoft Hyper-V, the community support for Citrix Hypervisor is somewhat less extensive. It is not vast. If there are any issues or errors, the community support is not that good. Those are definitely important disadvantages.
Lan Tuong - PeerSpot reviewer
Jul 17, 2024
Useful to manage the virtual environments
The most valuable features of KVM for us are the console, which allows us to build or clone VMs quickly, and the ability to take snapshots and recreate new VMs rapidly. That's one of the things we love about KVM. The built-in management console, Auto KVM, is the most valuable tool for managing our virtual environments. We use it most to create and fire up new VMs or clone them for customers based on requests. The migration tools have worked quite well for us. We're moving from an Oracle Solaris platform for KVM logical domains, upgrading, and using KVM from Red Hat. It's slightly different but very similar to Oracle Unbreakable Linux, which is basically a clone of Red Hat. Oracle's console is easier to use than Red Hat's, though.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features are being able to host many virtual machines and being able to patch machines."
"We find there are good central maintenance and central management panels."
"The solution is extremely stable."
"The core function enables multiple virtual machines to run on a single physical server. This maximizes hardware utilization and efficiency."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is very fast. It also works very well for physically small servers."
"The continued uptime of our virtual machines is good."
"What I find most valuable in Citrix Hypervisor is its licensing policy, because you'll get it for free if you buy a Citrix XenDesktop license. You don't need to spend additional money on the Citrix Hypervisor because you can manage both the Citrix XenDesktop and the Citrix Hypervisor with just one license, so you can save on cost. I also like that the solution is good support-wise. Hardware support is also faster compared to other solutions."
"It is quite flexible and rugged. It is also easy to understand and user-friendly. It is not as complicated as some of the other solutions. It has its technicalities, but it is easy to understand. You can easily pick up in a short period of time and understand how to manage the infrastructure."
"The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before."
"I think nine out of the ten supercomputers in the world use Linux KVM, so I think that attests to the fact that it is a scalable product."
"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."
"Very cost-effective."
"If you prefer command-line, there are all kinds of command-line options."
"If you are a Linux desktop user, KVM is the solution to go with if you have to start virtual machines with Linux or other operating systems with almost zero extra configuration needed."
"The product is scalable."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
 

Cons

"It needs improvement with the security features."
"The solution needs better backup facilities that are available for virtual machines to create servers on."
"The main problem with Citrix Hypervisor is getting readily available backup solutions for it. It would be wonderful if Hypervisor were better integrated with third-party backup solutions."
"It can be useful to have a web management program because we have to install our client-server. We have to properly manage the host, if we had administration tools through a web interface it would be a benefit."
"Network management needs improvement because it is not very stable."
"The solution is only in English. It would be ideal if it was in Portuguese."
"It needs to have a more robust backup solution."
"Citrix Hypervisor is expensive if you get it as a stand-alone product, so this is one area for improvement. Its price could be cheaper. We also found other areas for improvement in Citrix Hypervisor, for example, we can't use SCIM provisioning, and there are limitations to the size of the HDD. Another area for improvement is the pass-through storage, in particular the removable storage, because that also has limitations where you can't connect to the drive if it is more than one TB."
"The main drawback in the solution is probably disaster recovery."
"I would like to see more focus on microservices and integration with Kubernetes or OpenShift."
"The networking with wireless devices needs improvement."
"The KVM tech support is really bad. They are not very responsive."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"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 think the management console has room for improvement. It could be more straightforward and user-friendly, like VMware's Console Management. This would make it easier for system admins to use and reduce training needs."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Citrix Hypervisor can be fairly expensive."
"There is a license required to use this solution. You need a license on every server, but the license is more for support than anything else. The cost is not expensive, it is a fraction of the cost of VMware. When you look at the cost overall and features, Citrix Hypervisor has a very attractive offering."
"Citrix Hypervisor is a licensed product, and customers who buy the Citrix XenDesktop get Citrix Hypervisor for free. If they don't buy the license for Citrix XenDesktop, they'll need to pay for Citrix Hypervisor and its price is high. Pricing is even higher than VMware. The licensing policy for Citrix Hypervisor is good. It's straightforward. The only issue is the price because it's an expensive product."
"We used it only for some desktop licenses, so the pricing is great. We used the free licenses for server virtualization."
"Citrix is a good low-cost alternative to VMware, so if budgeting is an issue then I would recommend it."
"To subscribe to the paid version with support, it is approximately $6,000 per year."
"The pricing and licensing is so important. Customers do consider the price seriously."
"I am fine with their license support. What we have right now is permanent, so I don't have a problem with their license."
"KVM is an open-source product that works well for us."
"One only needs a subscription to Oracle Linux. So, it's cheaper with Oracle Linux's subscription. It is not very expensive. In short, the solution is open source, and you need only a subscription."
"KVM is an open-source solution."
"The solution is extremely cheap in China."
"KVM is priced reasonably."
"It is cheaper than other solutions out there on the market."
"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."
"We had some problems with the licensing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Virtualization Software solutions are best for your needs.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VL
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…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
52%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
4%
Financial Services Firm
4%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Citrix Hypervisor?
The core function enables multiple virtual machines to run on a single physical server. This maximizes hardware utilization and efficiency.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Citrix Hypervisor?
I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, with one being very inexpensive and ten being very expensive.
What needs improvement with Citrix Hypervisor?
It would be very helpful if I could browse the data store directly in the GUI, similar to VMware and Hyper-V. This feature would be particularly useful when something goes wrong with a virtual mach...
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...
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...
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.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Hypervisor
No data available
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

U.S. Army Shared Services Center, SoftLayer, Educational Services of America, Independent Bank, and SK Telecom.
MediaWiki, Wikimedia Foundation, Wikipedia, Wikivoyage, Wikidata, Wikiversity, Commons
Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix XenServer vs. KVM and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.