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.
"It is actually very low on resources. It doesn't use many resources. It is also very easy to tailor. You can change things like the amount of memory and storage on the fly. It is very stable and reliable. I like its replication feature, which is very good. It is also very easy to move the virtual machines across push servers without any difficulty. Its performance is also very good. Now with this pandemic, a lot of workers are working from home. A lot of workers have been using laptops as their desktop computers, and they would remote into a virtual PC. There is no difficulty, and they can't tell the difference between this and the real one. It is much easier to manage."
"It is stable."
"We chose this solution because of the pricing and the simplicity of the product."
"The restore function of the virtual server is valuable to me."
"I like that Hyper-V comes for free with Windows Server. You don't need to buy the license, and you only have to pay for the management aspect in System Center."
"It is an affordable platform."
"The initial setup of Hyper-V is far easier than VMware."
"The solution is easy to configure."
"The solution has high availability."
"Good virtualization and ability to optimize and deliver an automated and orchestrated cloud platform on-prem."
"Stable and secure management console for virtual environments, with a diligent technical support team."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the overall good ease of use and the good interface which makes it very easy to migrate from one bare metal to another. These are the two things which I like about it."
"It is very stable and scalable, and implementation is straightforward as well."
"The most useful features are ESXi, DRS, Auto Deploy, and the Lifecycle Manager."
"We use the solution's vMotion feature to migrate VMs from one host to another across different environments and data centers."
"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."
"When it comes to Hyper-V the worst thing is it's based on the Windows operating system. For the installation of Hyper-V, you're supposed to install the right operating system. For me, it's strange."
"The pricing and technical support can be improved."
"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."
"The weakness of Hyper-V is in its interaction with iSCSI protocols."
"Failure capabilities are insufficient for disaster recovery."
"Microsoft tech support is horrible."
"The solution should improve its native integration with other public cloud solutions."
"Enhanced visibility and reporting capabilities are desired for better insights and analysis."
"I think the pricing could be lower, and the technical support could be improved."
"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 biggest pain point is probably the firmware management of the underlying hardware. It could be a lot better."
"The performance of the solution could be better and there could be an extra level of security."
"Lacks a simplified integration with services automation."
"From my point of view, my advice is to design the solution properly the first time."
"Reducing the cost of vSphere would be an improvement."
"Here in Egypt, we would like everything free. So if you give us the license for free, we would be thrilled."
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, KVM, Oracle VM VirtualBox and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas VMware vSphere is most compared with Proxmox VE, Oracle VM, VMware Workstation, 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.