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.
"II prefer customers to use Hyper-V because Hyper-V is mostly integrated with Microsoft solutions."
"It is a stable product."
"The solution is stable and the cost is reasonable."
"It helps us build servers."
"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."
"The solution's technical support is the best."
"It makes it easier to deploy service. All service tends to migrate onto the server house without having problems now. It is hardware independent."
"This is the best solution for customers with budget constraints."
"Once you have everything configured, it is relatively straightforward."
"Server consolidation. Getting rid of our physical servers and going virtual is saving us some money in overall rack space."
"It is very versatile. All features are beneficial and very good, especially DRS and resource pooling."
"It is highly scalable. We need to scale out and up, and we can do that with vSphere. We can easily add more storage, drives, or memory."
"It has high clustering and availability features. These features are not found with other hypervisors."
"The solution is user-friendly and easy to manage."
"being able to manage a lot of servers in one pane of glass makes things a lot simpler. Basically, a lot of things just happen in one area. You can roll things over, move things around more dynamically, without having to hit multiple systems."
"Has many good features, and is stable and reliable."
"The only issues we have had recently are with Windows updates that are built into the Windows server with Hyper-V."
"Sometimes it is a mess, and it is getting hanged. It should be something that could be easily fixed. It made us have to deal with fixing the bugs."
"It might make it easier to move VMs across Hotmail hosts. This application process make it a little bit easier."
"The management of Hyper-V could improve, there is a lot to improve in that area."
"The live migration feature needs improvement."
"Hyper-V isn't a lightweight solution like VMware. Management could be more straightforward. Even as far as disk management tools are concerned, it would be better if that could be made simpler. The same applies to performance."
"In an upcoming release, they can improve by having better cloud integration. We are all moving towards the clouds and the integration is only through the Azure Stack, there should be tools built in to move the VMs natively to the cloud and infrastructure. Additionally, they could provide some form of multi-cloud integration."
"We've had many issues with Hyper-V's stability, including resource crunches and memory leakage."
"Sometimes you can't find items and you need to log onto different physical servers to do technical tasks. I don't fully understand why this is the case."
"The licensing costs are expensive and most of the important features require a license."
"They can maybe review its price. They can also consider offering a free public version for development for a certain number of users."
"The user interface could use some improvement."
"Inability to get to a single hypervisor environment to support a container environment."
"I can't speak to any missing features. It has everything I need."
"I do not find it to be simple and efficient to manage. The tools, the interface to manage it, are a pain. In the latest version, they moved us to web-only, the Web Client and it's terrible. It's slow. It crashes. It's annoying. I used the Web Client in the older version and was happy. I would go back to the regular thick client but I don't have that option anymore, so I am always fighting it."
"It is expensive. They can improve the licensing cost for Cloud Director. They can also improve the integration with other applications and the metering feature, which is currently not flexible."
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.