We performed a comparison between Nutanix AHV and VMware vSphere based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Nutanix AHV and VMware vSphere have a similar user rating regarding ease of deployment and service and support. If pricing is a factor, Nutanix AHV had a better rating. Regarding features, Nutanix AHV users felt there were software compatibility limitations, whereas VMware vSphere users felt the solution wasn’t so user-friendly.
"This solution is very stable and it has been running for the last three months, with no issues."
"The storage features and volume system are great."
"I would rate the stability a ten out of ten."
"Integration is the most valuable feature of the product."
"Nutanix AHV works really well. It's much easier to administer and manage than VMware. Since we're not a large IT department within the finance sector, our team is relatively small. We don't have a huge team of IT professionals to manage all the other systems."
"Nutanix AHV virtualization requires little disk size for a huge number of servers. We can do everything from a single dashboard, monitoring performance, and single-task boxes."
"It's user-friendly."
"Nutanix AHV is very scalable. It can go to unlimited nodes."
"It is highly scalable. We can add new hardware and expand the infrastructure easily."
"Its dynamic resource scheduling and its fault tolerance capabilities are two features that I've found to be valuable. I also like that VMware vSphere is stable, scalable, and easy to install."
"Virtualised automation is a useful feature."
"Most valuable features are quick provisioning, High Availability, and DRS for balancing workload."
"Server Virtualization is the most important feature because that helps me to utilize 100% capacity of my physical server or box. Its redundancy, uptime, or high-availability is also valuable. Storage-sharing is also valuable. In vSAN, I can utilize the maximum storage. In the physical boxes, if you don't require storage, it lies idle, but with VMware or any kind of virtualization, you can utilize the full storage."
"The stability of VMware vSphere is very good. It has high resiliency, it is one of the best solutions on the market."
"We find the solution simple and efficient to manage."
"We use it for our VDI infrastructure and managing virtual machines."
"It would be better if the solution's replication to another site could be efficiently optimized."
"In the next release of this solution, I would like to see support for containerization."
"Adding even more integrations would be an improvement."
"Lacks integration with the cloud or other solutions."
"There is no web interface for AHV."
"The software based controller has high consumption. This could be improved."
"Honestly, there's a lot to work on the product, especially for someone like me who has worked on VMware. VMware offers a significant level of customization when configuring virtual machines, and that level of detail is not as pronounced on Nutanix AHV Virtualization."
"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."
"The ability to run ARM based VMs on an x86 platform for testing purposes. With the growing use of SBCs running on ARM architectures for IoT devices, it would be very useful if developers could build and deploy VMs running operating systems like Raspbian used on Raspberry Pi devices on their existing x86 ESXi environments. Even if this is not possible through some form of emulation, the ability to add ARM hypervisors to vSphere environments would be very useful. This will enable more rapid development cycles for customers just getting started with IoT but already existing vSphere users."
"The vSphere Client always feels slow, and/or like it doesn't keep up with what I'm trying to do. So I usually use the thick client most of the time."
"Its price can be better. It is very expensive."
"The documentation could be improved. It does not help me to show the client the value of going with VMware vSphere rather than an open source or cheaper solution."
"I recommend that VMware vSphere continue to release more features."
"The setup is easy. However, the configuration expansion can be difficult. The full implementation took three to four days. This included the move from physical servers to virtual ones."
"I would like more Amazon stuff inside of VMware."
"Pricing is starting to get a little high-end."
Nutanix AHV Virtualization is ranked 6th in Server Virtualization Software with 45 reviews while VMware vSphere is ranked 2nd in Server Virtualization Software with 446 reviews. Nutanix AHV Virtualization is rated 8.6, while VMware vSphere is rated 8.8. 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 VMware vSphere writes "Offers good performance and is useful for banking systems". Nutanix AHV Virtualization is most compared with Proxmox VE, Hyper-V, KVM, Citrix Hypervisor and RHEV, whereas VMware vSphere is most compared with Hyper-V, Proxmox VE, Oracle VM, VMware Workstation and RHEV. See our Nutanix AHV Virtualization 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.