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.
"There are two very good things about this product including licensing and stability."
"It is definitely the toughest competitor for VMware. It easily increases memory for our virtual machines."
"There are some products that you can mount over Hyper-V that provide the features that, in today's Hyper-V, are not present."
"The solution has good scalability."
"Live migration, SMB3."
"I find the ease of use the most valuable asset of the solution."
"The performance is very good."
"The organization has realized the benefits on smaller data center space, power, cooling, etc. apart from the benefit that the virtualization layer brings in."
"The solution is scalable."
"Technical support was helpful and knowledgeable."
"VMware Tanzu (container) is the most valuable addition because you get an efficient solution to manage the VM and container in a single pane of glass."
"The initial setup is very simple."
"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."
"Has many good features, and is stable and reliable."
"The solution is easy to use, user-friendly interface and has high availability features. When comparing it to other solutions it is more robust."
"It is a very dependable solution. Its performance is very good, and it is also easy to manage and implement."
"The solution is lacking in numerous features and lacks flexibility."
"The corrupted volume is a problem."
"There needs to be more functionality overall in the Hyper-V manager."
"The interface could be more user friendly. In addition, the documentation and security could use improvement."
"I think the console could use some improvement for the backups."
"We would like to have a cloning function added to this product."
"Hyper-V serves its purpose, but some areas may not be as feature-rich as alternatives like VMware ESXi."
"VLAN is not very easy to configure."
"I would like to see improvements in simplifying automation, cloud native deployment, administration, and fault resolution."
"Its price could be better. It is expensive, and its price is a big concern."
"The biggest pain point is probably the firmware management of the underlying hardware. It could be a lot better."
"Sentencing has changed a lot."
"I would like to see VMware vSphere provide a centralized patch service on the VMware level, regardless of your operating systems."
"It could improve the hyper-conversions."
"The solution is stable. However, it could improve by being more secure."
"The one area where I would love to see an improvement is the HTML5 client. It's great, but it could get better."
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.