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 most valuable feature of Hyper-V is the replica service."
"It allowed us to add on servers and fix things in an expedient manner."
"The product is easy to manage. It improves our VM management."
"I appreciate its stability and user-friendly management interface."
"My understanding is it's easy to set up."
"Hyper-V integrates well with other Microsoft solutions."
"It utilizes the hardware so there are multiple applications running on one hypervisor."
"It works very well. Its performance, stability, and redundancy are all very dependable."
"The main benefit of the version 6.7 is that it makes end-users able to use the interface much more effectively. They don't have to install a client on their machine, they can do it from their phone, their laptop, their tablet, any OS, anytime. It's a better experience for the end-user."
"The performance of VMware vSphere is good."
"The emphasis isn't specifically on a particular feature, but rather on the ease of use. For instance, when building a test lab or setting up an entire environment from scratch, VMware products are notably more user-friendly compared to alternatives like Nutanix. I've had prior experience with Nutanix. From my personal perspective, I found it easier to adapt to using VMware than when I started using Dynamics. This ease of use is a strong point. It's largely about how straightforward it is to navigate through VMware's user interface. In contrast, with Nutanix, there's a need to delve into smaller configurations and navigate vendor-specific settings. VMware, on the other hand, offers a more accessible management page. This difference primarily centres around usability and the overall user-friendliness of the interface."
"The virtualization, the remote management user interface, and the web console are most valuable."
"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 stability of VMware vSphere is very good. It has high resiliency, it is one of the best solutions on the market."
"The DRS feature of this solution is a very valuable feature."
"The fact that we have the ability to easily scale out, and the ability to do maintenance on the underlying hardware without impacting our business applications, are important aspects."
"The management interface is in need of the biggest improvement."
"Hyper-V requires improvement with manageability."
"Status and availability became an issue and need."
"There is a problem with high-availability if the load is too high."
"The interface could be more user friendly. In addition, the documentation and security could use improvement."
"There is a hard limitation of 20 gigs per file with Dropbox, so you've got to overcome that by chunking the zip files into something smaller and manageable."
"Storage via SMB3."
"The cost and licensing can be improved."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The price could be better. The licensing is definitely expensive and tech support is sometimes frustrating."
"Security and patch-related items need improvement."
"Due to the fact that during the last three months there appeared some critical bugs, the virtual machine backup might be inconsistent."
"An improvement could be in terms of keeping up with the upgrades. The upgrades could be set in an automated way so that the newer features don't require you to manually update, or you get an option to update automatically. This would be a useful enhancement."
"I would like to start to using NSX in the next release."
"The hardware cost is high."
"We'd always like to see the price drop, but I realize that may not be realistic."
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.