We performed a comparison between Hyper-V and VMware VSphere based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: VMware VSphere is the winner in this comparison. It is easy to deploy, reliable, robust, and has excellent customer support. Hyper-V does come out on top in the pricing category, however.
"One of the most valuable features of Hyper-V is ease to use."
"The initial setup is simple. There's not much to do. We input one command or just one or two clicks on the UI. Initial setup in the Windows environment for any software is not that difficult."
"This solution is much easier to manage than a bare metal machine. It is so easy to manage something through the virtual machine."
"Hyper-V helps to make a replica server between two machines. It is very easy to learn."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from how my company uses Hyper-V for replication."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The implementation process is simple."
"It is easy to use, and it is stable. It is a good solution."
"I don't see any challenges in using this product."
"The fact that you can use all the CPU and memory power that the server can provide is most valuable. In a physical server, you might end up not using all the physical resources. There are a lot of benefits, such as flexibility and mobility, in virtualizing computes."
"The solution is user-friendly. It is easy to convert, create, and manage systems."
"It has high clustering and availability features. These features are not found with other hypervisors."
"Production people can quickly reboot the server with ESXi Quick Boot."
"It's much more stable than other products. It is scalable and easy to implement as well."
"VMware vSphere helps us in not wasting resources like we did when we were using physical servers. It changed our whole environment."
"Basic hypervisor functions with HA."
"The technical support is good but it could improve by being faster."
"They should include a few more hardware components for integration with servers."
"SCVMM needs to be more user-friendly. Without SCVMM, automating is not easy to use and we look forward to the upcoming versions of SCVMM becoming simpler and more admin friendly."
"I would like Microsoft to put more effort into the Admin Center interface and make it much easier. It is customizable, but you have to be a PowerShell expert to customize these things. That is a limitation."
"The Hyper-V management console could be improved to make it easier. It should be a little bit more granular. Various virtual switches could also be improved to make virtual desk management slightly better. The replication could be improved slightly. The checkpoints or snapshots could be improved to make it a bit more transparent to the user."
"Some of the interfaces need improvements, like the virtual switch or virtual VLAN interfaces."
"The solution is heavily reliant on Microsoft's active directory for authentication, for coordination between nodes. Therefore, it inherits all the issues that are within the active directory."
"Hyper-V could improve by making it easier to manage."
"The initial setup could be better. It manages all the setups, but it's not very straightforward, and it takes time."
"The improvement is more from a licensing perspective rather than from a feature functionality perspective. There could be more flexibility and fewer model options to make it easier to sell. Today, there are so many different options available, and sometimes, it is not really clear which one is the right version or the right model to propose."
"There should be more stability in the updates. They had an issue with the last release."
"As we introduce the DevOps culture, we need to make sure that the principles and tools used to support this approach can be easily integrated and interoperated with the vSphere environment with no (or less) redundancy in tools and functionality."
"The technical support is poor. We are in Australia, but we do not have the same level of support as the US and Europe."
"The solution should offer more integration capabilities."
"Integration with different platforms could be improved."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 134 reviews while VMware vSphere is ranked 2nd in Server Virtualization Software with 446 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 8.0, while VMware vSphere is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Hyper-V writes "It's a low-cost solution that enabled us to shrink everything down into a single server ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware vSphere writes "Offers good performance and is useful for banking systems". Hyper-V is most compared with VMware Workstation, Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox, KVM and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas VMware vSphere is most compared with Proxmox VE, VMware Workstation, Oracle VM, KVM and Nutanix AHV Virtualization. See our Hyper-V 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.