We performed a comparison between Nutanix AHV and VMware vSphere based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Nutanix AHV and VMware vSphere have a similar user rating regarding ease of deployment and service and support. If pricing is a factor, Nutanix AHV had a better rating. Regarding features, Nutanix AHV users felt there were software compatibility limitations, whereas VMware vSphere users felt the solution wasn’t so user-friendly.
"The most valuable feature is manageability."
"Nutanix AHV Virtualization is a private cloud platform offering integration with various public cloud providers. This integration allows for a multi-cloud approach. In my opinion, Nutanix AHV Virtualization's strength is its storage. It innovates and excels in the hyper-converged storage segment, making it the number one choice in this area."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is that you don't need to pay for it, it's free, as opposed to paying for a VMware license."
"The most valuable feature of Nutanix AHV is that it can be managed through Hyper-V, which is Microsoft's hypervisor, VMware, and Citrix XenServer."
"I would rate the stability a ten out of ten."
"The solution scales very well."
"It is a stable solution. I haven't faced stability issues in the solution."
"It's user-friendly."
"It's easy to use, and it is flexible."
"The pricing of the product is reasonable."
"The most valuable feature would be the slight changes they've made to VMFork instant cloning, in which they have abstracted out the parent-child relationship in cloning, in which certain features, like HA and DRS, are now usable on that parent virtual machine. That is wildly amazing and something that wasn't available until 6.7."
"The product offers good stability."
"It is a very stable solution. Integration with other environments was simple to achieve."
"The most valuable features are that it's stable, easy to use, and it's flexible."
"Valuable features really depend on different projects. We are using the traditional infrastructure based on VMware vSphere. We are also using the high availability (HA) and Distributed Switch features to extend our network and switch between different hosts. The VMotion and SVMotion features are very essential for us to relocate the storage of virtual machines to different storage or vSANs. We are using VMotion and SVMotion features several times of the day. We are also using another VMware product to replicate a lot of solutions to a second replication site."
"It is a very dependable solution. Its performance is very good, and it is also easy to manage and implement."
"The technical support for this solution needs to be improved in terms of response time."
"Lacks integration with the cloud or other solutions."
"To face no complications in our company, we had to switch off virtual machines one after the other before heading to Nutanix platform and going to edge services to switch off and turn off everything, making it a challenging process for me."
"It would be better if the solution's replication to another site could be efficiently optimized."
"I haven't come across any limitations. Nutanix doesn't support externally attached storage through Fibre Channel. However, Nutanix doesn't support Fibre Channel connectivity. This, in my opinion, is a weakness of Nutanix. For instance, it does not support Cyber Talent. To clarify, you cannot connect external Fibre Channel storage or NAS storage resources with Nutanix. However, VMware vSAN supports such solutions."
"When we need to share, publish, or encrypt something, we still need to perform it using the command line."
"It worked well in the beginning but after using it for some time, we found some limitations in terms of compatibility with other software."
"In terms of improvement, I think that they could have more partnerships with providers."
"I would like to see more support regarding containers, and they need more features for them."
"The performance of the solution could be better and there could be an extra level of security."
"We'd always like to see the price drop, but I realize that may not be realistic."
"An area for improvement is that when comparing VMware to Nutanix, Nutanix has higher availability, like clustering for virtual machines. That is a good idea and VMware could profit from something like that for higher availability installations."
"It would be nice if it had auto-scaling, no need to select CPU or select database size. Let it auto-scale, let it use the features that VMware has, instead of having to preselect."
"Support for the product is not good enough."
"The solution should offer more integration capabilities."
"It needs to integrate better between multiple modules."
Nutanix AHV Virtualization is ranked 6th in Server Virtualization Software with 45 reviews while VMware vSphere is ranked 2nd in Server Virtualization Software with 446 reviews. Nutanix AHV Virtualization is rated 8.6, while VMware vSphere is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Nutanix AHV Virtualization writes "Lightweight, integrates well, and the technical support is responsive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware vSphere writes "Offers good performance and is useful for banking systems". Nutanix AHV Virtualization is most compared with Proxmox VE, Hyper-V, KVM, Citrix Hypervisor and RHEV, whereas VMware vSphere is most compared with Hyper-V, Proxmox VE, Oracle VM, VMware Workstation and RHEV. See our Nutanix AHV Virtualization vs. VMware vSphere 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.
