TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Hyper-V vs. Kernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM) vs. Oracle VirtualBox

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Hyper-V

    Score8.4 out of 10
    N/AN/A

    $24.95

    per month

    KVM

    Score9.4 out of 10
    N/AKernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM) is a virtualization solution developed by small Israeli software company Qumranet and supported by Red Hat since that company's acquisition in 2008.N/A

    Oracle VirtualBox

    Score8.2 out of 10
    N/AOracle VirtualBox is an open source, cross-platform, virtualization software, enables developers to deliver code faster by running multiple operating systems on a single device.

    $0

    per month

    Pricing
    Hyper-VKVMOracle VirtualBox
    Editions & Modules
    Developer
    $24.95
    per month
    Bronze
    $49.00
    per month
    Silver
    $89.00
    per month
    Gold
    $135.00
    per month
    Platinum
    $199.00
    per month
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Hyper-VKVMOracle VirtualBox
    Free Trial
    NoNoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNoYes
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    Hyper-VKVMOracle VirtualBox
    Considered Multiple Products
    Microsoft
    Chose Hyper-V
    Oracle VirtualBox works just fine on workstations, for testing pourposes. But sometimes the virtual network conflicts with the physical cards on the workstation. VMware is the state of the art, but it costs more than gold, and you will have to license every Windows Server VM …
    Incentivized
    Chose Hyper-V
    Though Docker provides cross-platform support and isolation, Hyper-V provides true virtualization over the host OS and creates boundary over guest OS that protects the security threats, resource-hogging on the host OS.
    Incentivized
    Chose Hyper-V
    I used VMware vSphere at another company. However, for infrastructure with only two virtual machines, the VMware license cost is not worth it, because with the Windows Server Standard license you have the possibility to install two virtual servers at no extra cost.
    Incentivized
    Chose Hyper-V
    Hyper-V is powerful and virtualizes Windows exceptionally well, with less tweaking. It is also cheaper, and allows our clients to budget more for more frequent expansion. Its only real competitor in my opinion is VMware, and that is because vCenter is much more intuitive than …
    Incentivized
    Chose Hyper-V
    Hyper-V is far superior to all other virtual host software I've ever used...PLUS IT IS FREE!!! Compared to Oracle Virtual Box, which is also free, Hyper-V is giving you enterprise-level security, management, features and deployment/failover functionality not found elsewhere. …
    Incentivized
    Chose Hyper-V
    I would say Hyper-V would be a peer to VMWare. Features and stability are solid and full-featured for both products. Each have unique shortfalls that the other does not. VirtualBox is a great tool for desktop or laptop virtualization. It is not targeted as much for the …
    Incentivized
    Chose Hyper-V
    We use VirtualBox for non-production environments and pre-production testing because it's free. In our experience, we are not confident in VirtualBox for a production environment. On the flip-side, VMware is overkill for our needs and is too complex for our small I.T. dept to …
    Incentivized
    Chose Hyper-V
    Hyper-V competes very well with RHEV--not just on initial cost but also on capabilities and on learning. I know I've written a lot about learning, but it's significant when you have embraced a technology that is so difficult to use that no one wants to administer it. I've used …
    Incentivized
    Chose Hyper-V
    • Installing Hyper-V from the same media as the windows servers.
    • The default windows GUI makes Hyper-V easier to use for junior server managers.
    • Hyper-V gives the feeling that you already know it, while other products like VMware and VirtualBox need their own learning curve before …
    Incentivized
    Chose Hyper-V
    Hyper-v has been the most consistent across disparate host hardware.
    Incentivized
    Chose Hyper-V
    Hyper-V being 'free' was the main reason we went for it here. We gave VMware Workstation/Server a try when initially evaluating virtualisation options, but Hyper-V won out for ease of integration into our existing environment. VirtualBox was more of a 'plug in' solution which …
    Incentivized
    Chose Hyper-V
    VmWare, VirtualBox, Vagrant.
    Incentivized
    Chose Hyper-V
    While Hyper-V did stack better for our needs than Proxmox VE or KVM, it did not offer the features that ESXi did for our needs and we had to forgo choosing Hyper-V for the promiscuous mode needs.
    Incentivized
    Red Hat
    Chose KVM
    Kernel-based Virtual Machine is an open-source and free solution, compared to Virtualbox which is a product from Oracle.
    Incentivized
    Chose KVM
    Compared to VirtualBox, KVM has simpler licensing terms and is supported by the operating system vendor. KVM also has more mature integrations with other open-source projects. Automating provisioning is simple with KVM since it is available in the package repositories of …
    Incentivized
    Chose KVM
    KVM is free and provides environments where guests can run their own Kernel while still performing very well.
    It is also very native to work with KVM since it is integrated within the Linux Kernel.
    Incentivized
    Oracle
    Chose Oracle VirtualBox
    Oracle's solution is entirely free, although a bit clumsy and visually outdated. Hyper-V can and will be a better match due to having more resources, offering full Microsoft Support, and being focused mainly on corporative uses, but for a small environment, it can be like …
    Incentivized
    Chose Oracle VirtualBox
    The main benefits of Oracle VM VirtualBox are its licensing terms (it is free), its open-source nature, and its active community. However, its various competitors do a much better job when it comes to both ease of use and, most importantly, speed. For example, Parallels Desktop
    Incentivized
    Chose Oracle VirtualBox
    Reasons why I prefer to use Oracle VM VirtualBox:
    • I've worked and taught in many environments where the OS used by others (or by me for employment reasons) is a mix of Windows and Mac OSX. Sometimes Linux is around if I can help it. Being familiar with VirtualBox means I won't …
    Incentivized
    Chose Oracle VirtualBox
    VM VirtualBox is the best free option on the market. While VMware Workstation can offer better performance than VM Virtualbox, it has a price. The alternative that VMware offers for free virtualization is VMware Player, but offers many fewer features, and falls far short …
    Incentivized
    Chose Oracle VirtualBox
    Oracle VirtualBox is the better choice due to its cost-effectiveness, ease of use and feature set. However VMware Workstation is more suitable due to its superior performance, better features and better integration with enterprise tools. VMware Workstation also provides a …
    Incentivized
    Chose Oracle VirtualBox
    With regards to how some of the other virtualization software packages stack up again VirtualBox, I would say VirtualBox is ahead of the game especially when it comes to cost savings, as there is no ongoing cost for running the software. A big disadvantage to one of the other …
    Incentivized
    Chose Oracle VirtualBox
    I have used Linux KVM and Oracle VirtualBox in order to virtualize and manage different VMs. Oracle's solution, in my opinion, it is better because of the GUI, documentation and API.
    I have managed to write scripts to automate different procedures to help in my daily duties. I …
    Incentivized
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    94%
    Would buy again
    33 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    95%
    Would buy again
    18 Answers
    Delivers good value for the price
    100%
    Delivers good value for the price
    34 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Delivers good value for the price
    19 Answers
    Happy with the feature set
    94%
    Happy with the feature set
    33 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Happy with the feature set
    19 Answers
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    96%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    27 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    85%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    11 Answers
    Implementation went as expected
    97%
    Implementation went as expected
    32 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Implementation went as expected
    17 Answers
    Features
    Hyper-VKVMOracle VirtualBox
    Server Virtualization
    Comparison of Server Virtualization features of Hyper-V and Kernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM) and Oracle VirtualBox
    Feature
    Hyper-V
    7.6
    73 Ratings
    6% below category average
    Kernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM)
    9.2
    6 Ratings
    13% above category average
    Oracle VirtualBox
    8.2
    50 Ratings
    2% above category average
    Virtual machine automated provisioning6.861 Ratings7.05 Ratings8.036 Ratings
    Management console7.873 Ratings10.04 Ratings8.846 Ratings
    Live virtual machine backup8.265 Ratings10.04 Ratings8.236 Ratings
    Live virtual machine migration7.367 Ratings10.05 Ratings7.033 Ratings
    Hypervisor-level security7.867 Ratings9.04 Ratings9.029 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    Hyper-VKVMOracle VirtualBox
    Small Businesses
    Proxmox VE
    Score9.2 out of 10
    Proxmox VE
    Score9.2 out of 10
    Proxmox VE
    Score9.2 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    VMware vSOM (discontinued)
    Score10 out of 10
    VMware vSOM (discontinued)
    Score10 out of 10
    VMware vSOM (discontinued)
    Score10 out of 10
    Enterprises
    IBM PowerVM
    Score9.6 out of 10
    IBM PowerVM
    Score9.6 out of 10
    IBM PowerVM
    Score9.6 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Hyper-VKVMOracle VirtualBox
    Likelihood to Recommend
    8.4
    (74 ratings)
    10.0
    (6 ratings)
    7.5
    (53 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    10.0
    (7 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    10.0
    (4 ratings)
    Usability
    9.0
    (11 ratings)
    10.0
    (1 ratings)
    10.0
    (7 ratings)
    Availability
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    Performance
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    10.0
    (1 ratings)
    Support Rating
    7.5
    (16 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    10.0
    (2 ratings)
    In-Person Training
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Online Training
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Implementation Rating
    5.0
    (3 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    10.0
    (2 ratings)
    Configurability
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    Ease of integration
    7.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Product Scalability
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    Vendor post-sale
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Vendor pre-sale
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Hyper-VKVMOracle VirtualBox
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Microsoft
    Hyper-V makes a lot of sense in scenarios that will support several Windows Server-based OS virtual machines. The only limitation of those licensed VMs is the hardware that hosts the Hyper-V role. If you need to deploy many servers running Windows Server OS, it is worth the price. Hyper-V also does a great job of managing the server host's computational resources, including memory, CPU, network, and storage.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    KVM is the best solution in the case you need to test and turn up any virtual environment with limited vCPU/RAM resources. The obvious area of its use is a network environment when we want to avoid being tied to one type of hardware/vendor and being able to swap from one instance to another with no downtimes. The use of a vSwitch (that supports VLAN tagging) is a significant bonus for network engineers that some other hypervisors do not provide.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Oracle
    It is best suited when you want to have different operating systems on your laptop or desktop. You can easily switch between operating systems without the need to uninstall one. In another scenario, if you expect some application to damage your device, it would be best to run the application on the VM such that the damage can only be done to the virtual machine. It is less appropriate when time synchronization is very important. At times the VMs run their own times differently from the host time and this may cause some losses if what you doing is critical. Another important thing to take note of is the licensing of the application you want to run your VM. Some licenses do not allow the applications to be run on virtual servers so it is not appropriate to use the VM at this time.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    Microsoft
    • Easy to use GUI - very easy for someone with sufficient Windows experience - not necessarily a system administrator.
    • Provisioning VMs with different OSes - we mostly rely on different flavors of Windows Server, but having a few *nix distributions was not that difficult.
    • Managing virtual networks - we usually have 1 or 2 VLANs for our business purposes, but we are happy with the outcomes.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    • KVM is really good at providing fast and reliable virtualization for Linux guests
    • Since KVM is a kernel module, every VM is a Linux process which can be managed by Linux system tools
    • KVM integrates very well with the management framework libvirt, which is why KVM can be integrated in automation tools as well
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Oracle
    • It is simple to install - there is no advanced knowledge required to begin building virtual computers
    • It is easy to use - adding new virtual machines is simple with wizard-based deployment
    • It enables easy portability - moving virtual machines from one host to another is straight-forward and simple
    • It is free
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Microsoft
    • We manage Hyper-V using both System Center Virtual Machine Manager (SCVMM) and the in-build Hyper-V administration tool, the former being the main product we use as the built-in tool is very light on functionality, unlike VMware ESXi.
    • Management of storage is not great and quite a shift away from how VMware does it with ESXi; there is no separate panel/blade/window for LUNs/data stores, which means there is a lot of back and forth when trying to manage storage.
    • A dedicated client with all functionality in one place would be awesome.
    • Having the equivalent of ESXi's virtual console is something which is absolutely needed.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    • KVM itself doesn't ship with a management interface
    • KVM itself is a bit complicated to handle
    • KVM needs Qemu to virtualize Windows guests
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Oracle
    • I have had issues in the past when it has come to resizing VM disk storage. The issue is entirely detailed here: https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/9103 -- the problem was caused because of having existing snapshots (which error message output was not detailing). I haven't had to deal with the issue due to my dynamic disk sizes not being small from the start anymore (this is mostly an issue for my Windows VMs where the base disk may need significant size for the OS). It looks like, for a resize, that a merge of all snapshots has to occur first -- one user on that list details a workaround to maintain snapshots by cloning the VM. (Note: 5.2 was just released a few weeks ago, and looks like it should prevent the problem happening in the future by properly informing users that it isn't possible with snapshots).
    • Certain scenarios, like resizing disks, required dropping into a terminal as there were no options to previously do so via the GUI. According to some recent posts, I've seen that v5.2 has added disk management stuff like that to the GUI (or will be adding it). I'm comfortable with dropping into the terminal, but in a teaching scenario or when evaluating the learnability of the tools, it complicates things.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    Microsoft
    Cheap and easy is the name of the game. It has great support, it doesn't require additional licenses, it works the same if it is a cluster or stand-alone, and all the servers can be centrally managed from a system center virtual machine manager server, even when located at remote sites.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    No answers on this topic
    Oracle
    I give this rating because virtual box is inexpensive but there is another product such as vm ware that can also be used
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Usability
    Microsoft
    It is quite intuitive. Junior techs are able to provision and administrate Hyper-V virtual server infrastructure with little to no additional training. Documentation from Microsoft is easily avaliable and decently well written. Hyper-V is reliable and does what it is supposed to. Can be admin from an intuitive gui, or aoutmated with extensive powershell.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    It does the job and stays out of the way. The specifics of usability relies on the implementation, but with things like Icarus and libvirt, things are standardizing nicely.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Oracle
    I love using the Graphical User Interface. The VirtualBox Manager is very easy to understand and use. You can quickly create, configure and manage all your virtual machines in one window. It makes operating virtual machines easy and simple. When using VBoxManage it gives the user comprehensive control over VirtualBox so that you can use automation and scripting at the command-line interface
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Reliability and Availability
    Microsoft
    In the past 2 years our Hyper-V servers have only had a handful of instances where the VM's on them were unreachable and the physical Hyper-V server had to be restarted. One time this was due to a RAM issue with the physical box and was resolved when we stopped using dynamic memory in Hyper-V. The other times were after updates were installed and the physical box was not restarted after the updates were installed.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    No answers on this topic
    Oracle
    Dependency on the Host OS means it is as reliable as it is possible to be. Application errors are beyond the purview of the application.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Performance
    Microsoft
    Hyper-V itself works quickly and rarely gave performance issues but this can be more attributed to the physical server specifications that the actual Hyper-V software in my opinion as Hyper-V technically just utilizes config files such as xml, and a data drive file (VHD, VHDX, etc) to perform its' duties.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    No answers on this topic
    Oracle
    No issues, especially with the extensions addons.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    Microsoft
    I gave it a middle of the road rating - as far as getting direct help from Microsoft this never seems to happen. (Good luck getting ahold of them.) Getting help from online support forums is pretty much where I get all my help from. Hyper-V is used quite widely and anything you could need help with is out there and easily searched for on your favorite search engine.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    No answers on this topic
    Oracle
    Oracle have a very fast response rate and a strong user community. One can geet help from many sources if they choose to research for themselves.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    In-Person Training
    Microsoft
    We had in person training from a third party and while it was very in depth it was at a beginner's level and by the time we received the training we had advanced past this level so it was monotonous and redundant at that point. It was good training though and would have provided a solid foundation for learning the rest of Hyper-V had I had it from the beginning.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    No answers on this topic
    Oracle
    No answers on this topic
    Online Training
    Microsoft
    The training was easy to read and find. There were good examples in the training and it is plentiful if you use third party resources also. It is not perfect as sometimes you may have a specific question and have to spend time learning or in the rare case you get an error you might have to research that error code which could have multiple causes.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    No answers on this topic
    Oracle
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation Rating
    Microsoft
    initial configuration of hyper-v is intuitive to anyone familiar with windows and roles for basic items like single server deployments, storage and basic networking. the majority of the problems were with implementing advanced features like high availability and more complex networking. There is a lot of documentation on how to do it but it is not seamless, even to experienced virtualization professionals.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    No answers on this topic
    Oracle
    We really enjoy using virtual box. We do not require to buy expensive hardware but instead we can minimize costs and maximize profits.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    Microsoft
    VMware is the pioneer of virtualization but when you compare it with Hyper-V, VMware lacks the flexibility of hardware customization and configuration options Hyper-V has also GPU virtualization still not adequate for both platforms. VMware has better graphical interface and control options for virtual machines. Another advantage VMware has is it does not need a dedicated os GUI base installation only needs small resources and can easily install on any host.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    It is a very reliable solution that can be used for x86 architecture virtualization with low overhead. It is a free and open source software. Easy to use withOpenStack.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Oracle
    VirutalBox is very similar to using Vmware with the slight difference in appearance and what might be considered a less polished look. However, what it lacks in polish and looks it makes up for in functionality, easy of use and the wide range of operating systems and features it supports without the need of buying the full professional edition
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Scalability
    Microsoft
    Nothing is perfect but Hyper-V does a great job of showing the necessary data to users to ensure that there is enough resources to perform essential functions. You can also select what fields show on the management console which is helpful for a quick glance. There are notifications that can be set up and if things go unnoticed and a Hyper-V server runs out of a resource it will safely and quickly shut down the VM's it needs to in order to ensure no Hardware failure or unnecessary data loss.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    No answers on this topic
    Oracle
    The only problem I have found is that the deployment is dependent and intrinsically linked to the Host OS. This is different from bare metal solutions which remove that dependency on a Host OS. The latter is more reliable and removes a layer of potential failure.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    Microsoft
    • Massively positive impact on expenses in my company by reducing our storage needs drastically. We were able to reallocate the budget to upgrading our primary Hyper-V server with pure enterprise SSD's as we reduced the storage needs by over 50% and by this we increased performance by over 400%.
    • We have deployed more than 8 servers with EXTREMELY minimal cost using Hyper-V and not requiring another hardware server to host it. We have leveraged our hardware resources in our 2 servers so well that we were able to add many new services, not in place prior, as we did not have the servers to host them. Now with Hyper-V, we deployed many more servers in VM's, purchased OS's & CAL's, but did not need any hardware, which is the greatest expense of all.
    • With Hyper-V, our ROI was reduced from 36-40 months on our primary server, down to only 13 months by reducing costs of storage and adding so many more servers, by calculating the "would-be" cost of those servers that was avoided by creating them in Hyper-V.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    • Fast provisioning of new servers.
    • Huge drop of the cost of servers compared to bare metal.
    • Easy upgrades of resources, sometimes now even requiring a server restart.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Oracle
    • Minimal-to-no support needed from the DevOps team.
    • Provides a direct and an easy way to access multiple VMs inside the same machines which enables performing various testing and QA tasks without the need to switch hardware.
    • Automatic provisioning using tools (esp. Vagrant) which enables developing a base image once, and allows for exporting/importing anywhere across the developers team.
    • Very cost-effective (no fees or monthly subscriptions).
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots