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 implementation process is simple."
"The simplicity and intuitiveness of the platform. It was a very simple adaptation, if you have any experience in virtualization."
"The virtual SAN feature is helpful."
"The flexibility and API are the most valuable features. It helps us be able to integrate with other systems and then push data easily."
"It is very easy to install. It can be done in a day."
"I have found the GUI user-friendly and having the solution be a Windows application makes it familiar to users."
"II prefer customers to use Hyper-V because Hyper-V is mostly integrated with Microsoft solutions."
"It is definitely the toughest competitor for VMware. It easily increases memory for our virtual machines."
"What I like about it is being able to see my entire organization, especially with some of the newer enhanced links. All of my data centers show up in one view and I can see every server that's running. I also get performance statistics so if there are issues, major problems going on, I can see them."
"We use the solution's vMotion feature to migrate VMs from one host to another across different environments and data centers."
"The fact that you can use all the CPU and memory power that the server can provide is most valuable. In a physical server, you might end up not using all the physical resources. There are a lot of benefits, such as flexibility and mobility, in virtualizing computes."
"We've found the High Availability and flexibility to be important."
"VMware vSphere helps us in not wasting resources like we did when we were using physical servers. It changed our whole environment."
"An important vSphere feature from a security perspective is VM encryption. As is the right thing to do in this day and age, security needs to be the number one concern for any IT operator. While there are security solutions which can be delivered at the physical, hardware layer, they don't necessarily address all of the requirements from an encryption perspective. Being able to have VM-centric, VM-level encryption is a great feature of vSphere."
"The free ESXi hypervisor was a great way to get started, as it allowed us to introduce virtual machines so that users could start to experience the advantages."
"It gives us the ability to be running over 250+ VMs on five physical hosts and in various flavours of guest OSs."
"It needs to improve compatibility with third party software."
"When it comes to Hyper-V the worst thing is it's based on the Windows operating system. For the installation of Hyper-V, you're supposed to install the right operating system. For me, it's strange."
"In terms of performance, when compared to VMware, it is much slower."
"Microsoft tech support is horrible."
"They could work on lowering the cost of the solution."
"If you have a bigger implementation, you need more tools to coexist with many, many features that are not present in the base Hyper-V."
"It should be deployed with OS so there is no need to install OS separately, only select the OS and get it ready."
"We've had many issues with Hyper-V's stability, including resource crunches and memory leakage."
"Not having to buy something from a third-party to scan the actual hardware components, like the hard drives and the port containers and fan speeds; not having to bolt something on and go through another vendor, would be helpful."
"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."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"They must work on the price, as well as the technical support."
"One of the areas creating a crash is when you are cloning."
"It lacks a snapshot feature."
"In addition, I think they should come up with a backup feature which is more product enrichment-based. It should be a full-fledged backup solution. It just is not there right now."
"I would like to see DRS for the GPU machines."
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.