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 installation was straightforward."
"The implementation process is simple."
"We've probably seen a 50 percent speed increase on our SQL server. Hyper-V has also significantly reduced our downtimes with faster boot-up and reboot. If we have to reboot a server, there is maybe two or three minutes of downtime. When we were on a bare-metal server, it could be five to ten minutes due to the total boot time."
"It works very well. Its performance, stability, and redundancy are all very dependable."
"It makes it easier to deploy service. All service tends to migrate onto the server house without having problems now. It is hardware independent."
"It has provided a good cost-saving from the management perspective."
"The solution is stable."
"It's a very manageable product."
"It stands out as a comprehensive and advantageous solution, providing a full package that effectively caters to our needs for managing our private cloud."
"The roadmap for the product itself covers all of the features that we are looking for."
"We scale it both vertically and hortizonally. We have many data centers on it."
"The interface is good."
"The tool provides 99.99% uptime."
"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."
"VMware vSphere has very good applications and services."
"It helps us with TCO."
"I think there is room for improvement in terms of the cloud solutions."
"The solution should be compatible with different systems."
"I have found it difficult to manage more than one virtual machine."
"It needs to improve compatibility with third party software."
"The security part of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"We have our scientific network, and it's run off the university sever, and we need two servers to optimize our scientific work, such as the mathematics work. Then you have to work with Python and Java, and Microsoft isn't the best option for this kind of work"
"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."
"When one server or one virtual machine fails, or one is turned off, the virtualization stops, and we have to initiate again with human intervention."
"They need to further develop graphics virtualization."
"I can't speak to any missing features. It has everything I need."
"This solution should have a better backup policy. Furthermore, there should be an ability to expose the universal machine. In the current version, you need to shutdown and use an offline virtual machine to backup."
"One problem that needs fixing is when we run the backup for the servers, the servers become inaccessible to everybody on-site while it is creating a snapshot."
"I met with the lead solutions architect for vSphere, and one of the things that I really kind of sat him down on was, "What's the deal between these Custom Attributes and these Tags? What are you trying to do with that?" He said, "So here's the deal. I know that they're halfway done and we have a vision of where they're all going, but we'll get it there." That that would be a great ability, to keep all that metadata about your virtual machines inside the solution and staying with the machines."
"The pipeline feature can be improved, as it doesn't allow for specific situations."
"It's inherently complex. Operating a large virtual infrastructure is not an easy task for anyone."
"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, KVM, Oracle VM VirtualBox and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas VMware vSphere is most compared with Proxmox VE, Oracle VM, VMware Workstation, 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.