We performed a comparison between Nutanix AHV and Proxmox VE based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: The two solutions are comparable and receive similar ratings in most categories. However, users feel that Proxmox VE is more affordable than Nutanix AHV.
"With AHV, you can run micro-segmentation, which is, on the network security level, to have network virtualization across clouds."
"Integration is the most valuable feature of the product."
"The dashboard of the solution is one of its strongest points."
"In terms of features, Acropolis is a good virtualization manager and that it is on-premise. I use almost every technology they provide."
"It's user-friendly."
"The initial setup of Nutanix AHV Virtualization is straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of Nutanix AHV is the prism, it is a beneficial central management console."
"You don't need any other instruments for control, AHV. You only need to look at the prism to control all infrastructure."
"The ability to back up a host and keep it running is valuable."
"The most valuable features of Proxmox VE are the ease of containerization. Overall the solution is generic, feature-rich, and has compatibility."
"In addition to the virtualization, the firewall and the routing functions that it provides are valuable."
"The template option allows us to build a desktop in a VM, then quickly deploy as a linked clone."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution is extremely scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Proxmox VE is the linked clone."
"That the product is free and still has all the features you expect is a huge benefit."
"To face no complications in our company, we had to switch off virtual machines one after the other before heading to Nutanix platform and going to edge services to switch off and turn off everything, making it a challenging process for me."
"The software based controller has high consumption. This could be improved."
"It worked well in the beginning but after using it for some time, we found some limitations in terms of compatibility with other software."
"The solution should work to improve its stability."
"If we have to opt for a high level of capacity planning and need more analytics—like deciding on new purchases or budgeting, or if we need additional resources in the near future—we need to pay for Prism Central. I would suggest that Nutanix improve a bit on the analytics part of Prism Element so we can calculate those kinds of things within that flavor."
"Some companies do not support AHV."
"My storage use is doubled; if I am creating a one TB virtual machine then my storage policy will take two TB from my cluster."
"I haven't come across any limitations. Nutanix doesn't support externally attached storage through Fibre Channel. However, Nutanix doesn't support Fibre Channel connectivity. This, in my opinion, is a weakness of Nutanix. For instance, it does not support Cyber Talent. To clarify, you cannot connect external Fibre Channel storage or NAS storage resources with Nutanix. However, VMware vSAN supports such solutions."
"The solution is not good at upgrading and this is why I using version 6.2 and not version 7. There is no easy way to implement the upgrade. I don't have enough experience to do it safely."
"The initial setup has a pretty steep learning curve."
"The availability of the solution could be a bit better."
"Its user interface can be improved. In the version that I am using, not all functions can be performed by using the UI. There can be some improvement on that. I'm assuming that it has already been improved in the latest version."
"Proxmox VE can improve the management of virtual discs. For example, if my virtual disc is 200 GB and I want to decrease it is not easy. I have to do a lot of things to decrease the size of existing virtual machines. If the Proxmox VE team can make it easy for customers to instantly increase or decrease the virtual machine hard disc, it will be very helpful for me. However, the containers I can do it easily."
"Its performance and support can be improved. Currently, there is a cost for support."
"It might be interesting to have the ability to integrate with other cloud solutions."
"The virtualization can be better."
Nutanix AHV Virtualization is ranked 6th in Server Virtualization Software with 44 reviews while Proxmox VE is ranked 1st in Server Virtualization Software with 58 reviews. Nutanix AHV Virtualization is rated 8.6, while Proxmox VE is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Nutanix AHV Virtualization writes "Lightweight, integrates well, and the technical support is responsive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Proxmox VE writes "Easy to use and supports multi-monitors on multiple VMs in KVM". Nutanix AHV Virtualization is most compared with VMware vSphere, Hyper-V, KVM, Citrix Hypervisor and RHEV, whereas Proxmox VE is most compared with VMware vSphere, Oracle VM VirtualBox, KVM, Hyper-V and Citrix Hypervisor. See our Nutanix AHV Virtualization vs. Proxmox VE 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.
