Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
IT-Leiter (IP) at IN-telegence GmbH
Real User
I like the ability to execute live migrations

What is our primary use case?

Running virtualization clusters with more than 300 VMs.

How has it helped my organization?

The platform changes from hardware to virtualized whenever possible.

What is most valuable?

  • Open source
  • The ability to execute live migrations
  • Linux, a base OS.

What needs improvement?

Management of underlying volumes.

Buyer's Guide
KVM
March 2025
Learn what your peers think about KVM. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2025.
842,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.

For how long have I used the solution?

Three to five years.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Business Engineer and Consultant at All-Tech
Real User
A solution with an easy initial setup that's scalable and stable
Pros and Cons
  • "Scaling the solution is easy. You just have to add more hardware."
  • "The solution should be more user friendly. We are struggling with the command lines."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use it to write the payroll solution fort Windows Server 2012 and 2018.

What is most valuable?

The solution is very light when you are putting your Operating System on it. You forget that there's a virtual layer on your solution. You are using it as if it was a whole computer. It's like having an entire computer that you've launched and have running with the Operating System that you need to work with.

What needs improvement?

The solution should be more user friendly despite that some interesting graphical solutions are available to manage the VMs. it would be usefull that the solution integrate the VM snapshot features and make it graphical, so we have a VM infrastructure more complete and easy the backup/restore in case of issue.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution since 2014.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable. It's been stable since I started using it in 2014.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scaling the solution is easy. You just have to add more hardware.

How are customer service and technical support?

I've never needed to contact technical support. To me, that's a sign of a good solution.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is easy. There is a lot of documentation online, so if there is a problem the online information will help you. 

Deployment only took one hour.

What about the implementation team?

I handled the implementation myself.

What other advice do I have?

We're using the on-premises deployment model. We're using the community version of the solution.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
KVM
March 2025
Learn what your peers think about KVM. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2025.
842,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
PeerSpot user
Business process Advisor for RTP at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
I had lots of issue with it.

I have used KVM with centos 7. Unfortunately, I had lots of issue with it. First of all, I wanted all the VMs to share the same network. I had to modify the centos network interface files myself. I had to do it with every single VM. 

At some point it created lots of issue in the module firewalld which also act as the nat to connect the VM with the physical interface. I could read "command failed" for rules of a VM that was already deleted in KVM. 

Then, I had issues with virsh the command line of KVM. Among other things, it exports and imports VM. I wanted to move a Virtual Machines from kvm on centos bare metal server to kvm on debian bare metal server and I discovered that in order to do so, I had to modify the XML configuration inside the VM file. 

I have also been unable to clone VMs meaning they when i tried to run some VMs after cloning, they refused to start. I have also crashed the Centos host. At that point, I have decided to stop and move to my old friend Vmware workstation on Linux. I didn't have to modify any interface files and I could use a "bridge" mode by choosing it in the options so that all my VM were on the same network. Ok, Vmware workstation isn't a bare metal hypervisor but it is reliable. 

By the way, I prefer to spend time on developing stuff than spending my time setting up KVM or learning the commands of virsh to do basic stuff with it. 

On the internet, many geeks pinpoint the performance of KVM. It is true but it is futile issue as compared to issues related to a production environment. 

I am sorry to say that online propaganda made believe that KVM is a mature product that should be considered for production. I think KVM may be good for a lab where the VMs aren't critical.

Now, when I see Web hosting providers who run the Vps on top of KVM, I don't see them the same way. 

This made me aware of the issue related to the Type 1 hypervisor. Since a type 1 is a bare metal type hypervisor, it deals with masquerading (NAT), security, kernel, memory, data IO... Because of that, every module has to extremely stable and bug free. As I said before, I have been able to crash a centos 7 bare metal host (meaning it didn't reboot) without tweaking any packages or renaming any files. Just by doing heavy normal maintenance over Virtual machines. (Deleting, adding, cloning, changing virtual hardware, changing network data, Changing name...). 

On the other hand Vmware workstation is a Type 2 hypervisor meaning that this software is going to interact with the host without really modifying it. I did the same things as with KVM without any crash.

I am a MCSE and i have started "hypervising" with Ms Hyper V which is way better than KVM. As i am writing this, I think about all the good things, people write online about KVM. It makes believe that KVM is as good as Hyper V. However, it is not close to the truth. Hyper V is more stable. Its files are more portable. The migration features are robust. More importantly, it uses hardware better than Linux based KVM.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
it_user175725 - PeerSpot reviewer
it_user175725Solution Engineer at a engineering company with 51-200 employees
Vendor

Helpful info for evaluating of use.

See all 4 comments
Fausto Kenji Natsumeda - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 20
Helps to deploy application servers and host websites
Pros and Cons
  • "I appreciate the network passcode feature in KVM, as it provides a convenient way to manage DNS and cloud hosting."
  • "I have encountered difficulties in getting the tool's documentation."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use KVM to deploy application servers and host websites. We aim to explore its features further to enhance our projects and implement diverse environments within this virtualization software.

What is most valuable?

I appreciate the network passcode feature in KVM, as it provides a convenient way to manage DNS and cloud hosting.

What needs improvement?

I have encountered difficulties in getting the tool's documentation. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using the product for two years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

In my experience, I haven't encountered any issues with stability. Since I installed and started using it, the system has been working very well.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

My company has five users for the product. 

How are customer service and support?

I haven't contacted technical support yet. 

How was the initial setup?

KVM's initial installation was a bit challenging for me, but I believe it's more manageable for those with Linux expertise, especially given the available documentation. It took me approximately five days, working about three hours per day, to fully implement it. 

What about the implementation team?

I did the deployment myself. 

What other advice do I have?

I rate the overall product a seven out of ten. You need to have good knowledge of Linux and networks. I would recommend the product to my colleagues.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Solution Architect, IT Consultant at Merdasco - Rayan Merdas Data Prosseccing
Real User
Top 10Leaderboard
Good performance, but better management features and integration are needed
Pros and Cons
  • "The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before."
  • "Business continuity features need to be added."

What is our primary use case?

We are a consulting company and I work with a lot of solutions to compare them and find out which ones are good for my customers.

The primary use case for this solution is virtualization.

I use this solution in on-premises data centers.

How has it helped my organization?

Compared to other virtualization solutions KVM is much faster and better at managing resources. For example, we compared XEN, KVM, and Vmware for creating development infrastructure for our programmers, we ended up using KVM.

What is most valuable?

The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before.

The performance of this solution is great.

What needs improvement?

This solution is lacking in features such as management and integration.

  • This solution needs better integration with desktop virtualization.
  • Better integration with storage solutions is needed.
  • Business continuity features need to be added.
  • The live migration needs to be improved.
  • You cannot run this application in a data center using only the GUI, so you have to have some knowledge with Linux in order to best manage it.
  • Better network management software is needed.
  • Features like vSAN are not available on KVM.
  • Integration with Kubernetes would be an improvement.

Generally, this solution should be made easier to use. Many customers don't have enough experience with Linux or a deep understanding of operating systems, and they just want to use the product. This together with a lack of features has led customers to choose VMware.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with this solution for more than ten years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This solution is limited in terms of scalability. I think that it is suitable for a mid-range company, but for a larger company, it is not quick. It does not have features for companies that need expandable solutions.

This solution is not used directly by the end-users. If KVM is installed in their data center then they just use the virtual machine. Users don't care about infrastructure, they're just looking for stability and use the operating system for their service. It is the administrators who use this product. Typically, there are two or three administrators in each data center. In terms of end-users, I have seen more than one hundred concurrent users.

How are customer service and technical support?

We do not have access to Red Hat support from our country.

For technical support we depend on the internet and the knowledge of our administrators.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have used XenServer and VMware, and the performance of KVM is better than these.

When it comes to management, integration, business continuity, and live migration, KVM is lacking features and VMware is better in this area.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup of this solution is not hard, but when you want to use this product in your data center, you have to use the command-line interface to better manage it. You cannot run this application using the GUI alone, so if you don't have enough knowledge with Linux then you may have some trouble.

What about the implementation team?

Most of our solutions are implemented in-house as well as this one.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

This solution can be used for free but if you have an expert team on Linux OS, select this one. if you don't have them, forget about it.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I evaluate options such as XenServer, VMware, and KVM every six months in order to choose the best product for my customers.

What other advice do I have?

I have been using this solution since before it was owned by Red Hat, when it was community-based. It is easier to manage than ever before because you used to have to use the command-line interface, instead of the GUI.

I do not recommend this product for those looking for a stable and scalable virtualization solution because they will ultimately have problems in their data center. Just two weeks ago, I helped a friend of mine to migrate from KVM to VMware.

I think that if Red Hat worked on some business continuity features and add them to KVM then it would receive a better grade and be a more competitive solution.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Other
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
CTO at a computer software company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 20
Cost-effective, stable and scalable; support for snapshot and revert could be improved. HA features can be improved.
Pros and Cons
  • "Very cost-effective."
  • "Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."

What is our primary use case?

We integrate KVM as part of our product. I'm the CTO of our company. 

What is most valuable?

The solution is very cost-effective. VMware is exorbitantly priced and compared with other products KVM is much cheaper especially in the public cloud scenario.

What needs improvement?

Their support for snapshot and revert could be improved. I'd also like to see the product achieve high availability across clusters and to have more support for Apache CloudStack.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using this solution for over a year. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We haven't had any issues with stability. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is fine, no problems at all. 

How are customer service and technical support?

We have worked with certain support vendors and they're fine. In particular, we work with one of the Red Hat partners and we're quite happy.

How was the initial setup?

The complexity or otherwise of the initial setup depends on the situation but generally it's not too difficult. We offer our customers maintenance support which generally involves update patching.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

KVM offers both an open source and licensed version. 

What other advice do I have?

Before deployment, it's worth checking whether the solution fits your use case and how it would be used across various large deployments. Test it before implementing. 

I rate the solution seven out of 10. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Integrator
PeerSpot user
reviewer1455690 - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder at a retailer with 1-10 employees
Real User
Free, easy to use, stable, and mature
Pros and Cons
  • "It is easy to use, stable, and flexible. It is a pretty mature product, and it is faster than VirtualBox."
  • "Its resource usage can be improved."

What is our primary use case?

It is useful for everything for which you would use VirtualBox. It is the kernel virtualization model in Linux. I am using the 5.10 kernel. It comes with the Linux operating system.

What is most valuable?

It is easy to use, stable, and flexible. It is a pretty mature product, and it is faster than VirtualBox.

What needs improvement?

Its resource usage can be improved. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for several years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is stable.

How are customer service and technical support?

There is no support for it except in the community. If you want support, you have to pay a company that provides support for this platform.

How was the initial setup?

There is no installation as such.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It is free for everyone.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend this solution to others. If they were using Linux, this is a requirement.

I would rate KVM an eight out of ten. If KVM uses less resources, it might improve my score.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
IT Manager at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
Real User
Review about KVM

Valuable Features:

It gives us live VM migrations.

Improvements to My Organization:

It allows us to virtualize our entire IT Infrastructure without any software cost. We only need to spend money on support and deployment.

Use of Solution:

Used since 2009 from version 0.8, so 6 years now.

Deployment Issues:

No.

Stability Issues:

No.

Scalability Issues:

It's scaled for us since version 0.8.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user