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.
"Hyper-V improved the infrastructure drastically, not only from a performance perspective but from a control/administration view as well."
"I like that Hyper-V comes for free with Windows Server. You don't need to buy the license, and you only have to pay for the management aspect in System Center."
"I find that most of the competition is more or less the same. However, Hyper-V is, when you compare it to the older platforms like VMware, a little bit more advanced at this stage."
"The most valuable feature of Hyper-V is the replica service."
"Hyper-V deployment is very user-friendly. It supports partial scripting and offers a UI for a smooth experience. There's also PowerShell scripting available for advanced users."
"It allowed us to add on servers and fix things in an expedient manner."
"The solution is highly scalable."
"My understanding is it's easy to set up."
"The most valuable features for us are DRS, VMotion, and, of course, some of the analytics that we were able to define to quantify our workloads and tell us how we are able to make our data center more efficient."
"The scalability of the solution is good. You can scale up to maximum levels."
"The pricing of the product is reasonable."
"One of the things I like with the web client, versus the thick client, is that we're able to access all the vCenters that we manage. With the thick client, you have to log in to one vCenter at a time."
"It gives us the ability to be running over 250+ VMs on five physical hosts and in various flavours of guest OSs."
"The most valuable features are the virtualization and the performance on the virtualization platform."
"Since we have an internal cloud, suddenly people may require 1000 or 2000 VMS in something. We have options to analyze and make sure we have enough scalability."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to revert to previous snapshots during testing of various guest and application deployments."
"Hyper-V could improve the management tools."
"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"
"Hyper-V serves its purpose, but some areas may not be as feature-rich as alternatives like VMware ESXi."
"VLAN is not very easy to configure."
"Hyper-V systems need a lot of admin effort because security updates and monthly updates require rebooting after the update."
"There needs to be more functionality overall in the Hyper-V manager."
"The the only challenge for us was moving existing physical machines to virtual machines."
"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."
"I would like them to move into having a containerized application to manage the vCenter."
"The monitoring is not good in vSphere, many times you have latency or you cannot find what you want. The events should be improved."
"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."
"It lacks a snapshot feature."
"Monitoring information could always be improved."
"It would be nice to see it a little more tightly integrated with the patching solution so you could do it in one pane of glass. Right now, you have to jump back and forth. It's still not difficult, but you have to jump back and forth to do your update definitions and then go back and actually do the updates themselves."
"The biggest room for improvement would be just simplicity. It is very intuitive, but it needs somebody with a lot of IT background."
"VMware vSphere could be more secure and well-known to everyone."
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.