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 setup was straightforward and easy for our company. The deployment was fast."
"I like that it's easy to use."
"It's a stable product."
"I like the functionality."
"The flexibility and API are the most valuable features. It helps us be able to integrate with other systems and then push data easily."
"The most valuable feature is that it's an end-to-end solution."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"Hyper-V's technical support is good - they're responsive and sort cases based on criticality and category, so they get dealt with quickly and by the correct team."
"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."
"The most useful features are ESXi, DRS, Auto Deploy, and the Lifecycle Manager."
"The solution is user-friendly. It is easy to convert, create, and manage systems."
"The performance of VMware vSphere is good."
"The virtualization, the remote management user interface, and the web console are most valuable."
"The vMotion in particular I think is the most valuable because this feature provides migrations of virtual machines in case you want to run do maintenance."
"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."
"We have the possibility to move workloads to different locations."
"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"
"The weakness of Hyper-V is in its interaction with iSCSI protocols."
"I think the console could use some improvement for the backups."
"It would be nice if it was turned into its own product because that's the problem with it. It doesn't have a single place where you can manage things. You have to go into all different screens to be able to configure it. And then you have no idea what the performance is. It's really just a feature added to Windows, and Microsoft does not really have anything that pulls it all together well. Compared to VMware, it does not have everything collaborate on one screen."
"Status and availability became an issue and need."
"There needs to be more functionality overall in the Hyper-V manager."
"Microsoft tech support is horrible."
"Microsoft increased the price for this solution when adding the Storage Spaces Direct feature."
"There are some challenges around ESXi hosts — converting them into VMs."
"The technical support is good. However, it could be more seamless when it comes to chat support and lower response times."
"Integration with different platforms could be improved."
"The installation can take a long time, they need to improve on the simplicity and length of the installation."
"In addition, I think some of the backup features or the prediction features can be improved."
"It needs to integrate better between multiple modules."
"The VMware vSphere app is faster, compared to its web-based client. The web-based client is very slow, freezes, and is challenging to use."
"the HTML version of things needs to get a little bit better. The vSphere side of things gets a little difficult to manage; right-click, in some browsers, doesn't work as well as it used to. I'm seeing a little bit of general latency that we didn't used to get with the thick client, although it's getting there."
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.