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 a very stable product. We have not had any issues with Hyper-V crashing itself."
"The most valuable features are ease of use, and it gets the job done in a straightforward manner."
"The most valuable feature is the high availability of the solution."
"The solution has good scalability."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to integrate the Hyper-Visor center from one console."
"It's good for what it does. If you have a small or medium-scale acclimatization, it's an excellent solution."
"The simplicity and intuitiveness of the platform. It was a very simple adaptation, if you have any experience in virtualization."
"The interface is quite good."
"It's easy to use, and it is flexible."
"Their command-line tools integrate well with other Microsoft products like PowerShell, so I can manipulate VMs using it."
"The solution's flexibility allows us to implement it widely."
"It's extremely simple. Installing the ESXi is a piece of cake and then putting servers on there is really simple and having HA and building a cluster for our VM servers. It's very easy."
"Visibility: We can easily pull reports and give access to other people to look at specs or performance metrics."
"The web console is the most valuable feature for me. Because no matter what happens with the server, I can still get to it with the web console."
"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."
"Very reliable with a great community."
"An improvement I suggest is having more guest operating systems."
"I think there is room for improvement in terms of the cloud solutions."
"There is a problem with high-availability if the load is too high."
"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."
"VLAN is not very easy to configure."
"Status and availability became an issue and need."
"We've had many issues with Hyper-V's stability, including resource crunches and memory leakage."
"It needs to improve compatibility with third party software."
"They can maybe review its price. They can also consider offering a free public version for development for a certain number of users."
"I would like having something that works on a smaller screen, so we can get to it on our iPads and have it more touch-centric versus having to sit at a laptop."
"The license fee could be more affordable."
"Given that I've been using version seven, it seems that some of the bugs I faced during that version have already been addressed in subsequent updates. Although I haven't personally tested them yet, it appears that these issues have been resolved. In version seven, there was a problem with the network interface not responding due to certain configurations not being properly filtered. However, in version eight, this requirement has been minimized, so the mentioned bug is less likely to occur. Instead of solely addressing these fixes in newer versions, it might be beneficial for them to consider applying these improvements to the older versions as well. This approach could prevent users from feeling compelled to upgrade to version eight solely to avoid encountering the issue, and instead provide updates for version seven users."
"VMware vSphere could be improved with cheaper costs."
"It could improve the hyper-conversions."
"The solution is slower than other tools."
"They must work on the price, as well as the technical support."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 132 reviews while VMware vSphere is ranked 2nd in Server Virtualization Software with 443 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 "Allows for easy management of snapshots for virtual machines and good web console ". 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.