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.
"The solution has good scalability."
"The most valuable features are ease of use, and it gets the job done in a straightforward manner."
"The simplicity and intuitiveness of the platform. It was a very simple adaptation, if you have any experience in virtualization."
"The virtualization aspect of the solution functions similar to VMware is one of its most valuable features…It is a stable product."
"The setup was straightforward and easy for our company. The deployment was fast."
"The virtualized applications and real time audition of the VMA is quite a good feature."
"This solution helps us with production of our office business needs."
"The most valuable feature is that it's an end-to-end solution."
"I definitely like the stability, performance and ease-of-use."
"It is highly scalable. We can add new hardware and expand the infrastructure easily."
"Scalability is the big advantage of it. The product itself allows us to scale on the fly as we need it, and plan for the future."
"There are no issues with the level of scalability you can achieve."
"The most important feature is the ability to balance the servers with Distributed Resource Scheduler (DRS). It is a very useful feature and should be mandatory for vSphere to have but it is only available in the enterprise edition. It should be available in all versions."
"I have found the Storage vMotion feature to be the most valuable."
"Gathering all of the hosts together to create one single pool across the enterprise is a terrific feature."
"The VMware community is always there and it is a valuable resource."
"There's room for improvement in Hyper-V. One area I've personally encountered issues with is live migration. Sometimes during live migrations, the process gets stuck in a certain state. This can happen with replication as well. It's not necessarily a major problem, but at times, the error messages aren't very informative. They don't clearly explain why the migration failed."
"I'd like to see better predictive diagnostics, so I know what's going on with the machines."
"If you have a bigger implementation, you need more tools to coexist with many, many features that are not present in the base Hyper-V."
"The weakness of Hyper-V is in its interaction with iSCSI protocols."
"The product can be a bit difficult to use."
"One of the network problems I face is I cannot introduce other security layers on top of Hyper-V as you can in VMware. When it comes to the network the VMware is more flexible than Hyper-V."
"I would love to see other options for connecting VMs to large data storage."
"It needs to improve the handling of the amount of storage."
"Two improvements that I would like to see are higher resolution console modes for guests and easier switching between consoles."
"The one area where I would love to see an improvement is the HTML5 client. It's great, but it could get better."
"The solution is slower than other tools."
"The solution could improve by having more integration."
"It is not easy to upgrade VMware vSphere from an old version to a new version."
"Where I think there is room for improvement is in the HTML5 interface in vCenter. What it lacks, for me, is integrating to VMware's other products, especially NSX."
"We've been using vSphere on Windows 7, and it had less fluff associated with ThinApp. Currently, with Windows 10 version that we have, it adds a lot of bulk to ThinApp. We have offices spanning across Canada from the east coast to the west coast. A ThinApp that is roughly around 400 MB in size would take minutes to open up. With Windows 7, the same ThinApp used to be close to 75 to 80 MB in size. So, I'm really not happy with the extra fluff that is bundled in Windows 10. It really messes things up for us at times."
"The technical support is not too bad, but not the best."
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.