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's a stable product."
"The most valuable feature is that it is user-friendly and easy to use."
"The product is easy to manage. It improves our VM management."
"The simplicity and intuitiveness of the platform. It was a very simple adaptation, if you have any experience in virtualization."
"The virtualization aspect of the solution functions similar to VMware is one of its most valuable features…It is a stable product."
"It utilizes the hardware so there are multiple applications running on one hypervisor."
"The ease of use of Hyper-V is the most valuable feature."
"Hyper-V helps to make a replica server between two machines. It is very easy to learn."
"The ability of a running VM to be quickly relocated to another hypervisor or launched at another site via replicated storage greatly reduces downtime."
"The stability of the solution is excellent."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The connectivity is fantastic, and many functions can run together in one server. If you need to scale, we can continue to add components or modules. It's a beautiful virtual solution that has many advantages over physical hardware, where you have to use devices and wiring to connect all your projects."
"Using vSphere we have virtualized over one thousand servers and this gave us management, cost and datacenter space advantages."
"It cuts down on hardware costs by being able to virtualize multiple hardware and multiple machines on a single piece of hardware."
"The tool comes with scale-out capabilities. Deploying new infrastructure became much quicker, saving significant time previously spent sourcing hardware for each installation. It also has the ability to downscale on rack spaces, reducing the number of rack units needed to accommodate our servers."
"The solution can scale well."
"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."
"In terms of performance, when compared to VMware, it is much slower."
"The corrupted volume is a problem."
"There's room for improvement in Hyper-V. One area I've personally encountered issues with is live migration. Sometimes during live migrations, the process gets stuck in a certain state. This can happen with replication as well. It's not necessarily a major problem, but at times, the error messages aren't very informative. They don't clearly explain why the migration failed."
"Some of the interfaces need improvements, like the virtual switch or virtual VLAN interfaces."
"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."
"It needs to improve the handling of the amount of storage."
"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."
"Reducing the cost of vSphere would be an improvement."
"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."
"To manage it properly, you have to know this product really well."
"NSX is a product of VMware vSphere and it would be nice to see the solution have full integration capabilities with it."
"The technical support is poor. We are in Australia, but we do not have the same level of support as the US and Europe."
"I would like to see improvements in simplifying automation, cloud native deployment, administration, and fault resolution."
"The one area where I would love to see an improvement is the HTML5 client. It's great, but it could get better."
"I would like to see VMware head towards a more GPU friendly environment."
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.