We performed a comparison between Hyper-V and IBM PowerVM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Server Virtualization Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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."
"Microsoft's a good name for legacy support and solutions"
"The solution is highly scalable."
"Microsoft has documentation that is easy to find, helpful, and readily available."
"For me, the setup of Hyper-V was an easy process, which took only one hour from start to finish."
"The initial setup of Hyper-V is far easier than VMware."
"The virtualization aspect of the solution functions similar to VMware is one of its most valuable features…It is a stable product."
"I appreciate its stability and user-friendly management interface."
"PowerVM's most valuable features include swift optimisation and real-time migration."
"It is a stable solution with reliable performance."
"It is a complete solution."
"You can increase resources with it automatically."
"What I like about this solution, is that it is easy to configure."
"It's in English, so its exceptional qualities make the control environment more flexible, easier, more stable, and easy to recover after issues."
"Technical support is great."
"The stability is the most valuable aspect of this solution. IBM is the most powerful and stable platform."
"The solution is heavily reliant on Microsoft's active directory for authentication, for coordination between nodes. Therefore, it inherits all the issues that are within the active directory."
"It would be nice if they had video acceleration, they got rid of that and VMware has video acceleration."
"In terms of performance, when compared to VMware, it is much slower."
"Hyper-V serves its purpose, but some areas may not be as feature-rich as alternatives like VMware ESXi."
"We've had many issues with Hyper-V's stability, including resource crunches and memory leakage."
"It's not completely stable because your stack becomes bloated."
"I also use VMware which I find to be more scalable and stable overall."
"There's room for improvement in Hyper-V. One area I've personally encountered issues with is live migration. Sometimes during live migrations, the process gets stuck in a certain state. This can happen with replication as well. It's not necessarily a major problem, but at times, the error messages aren't very informative. They don't clearly explain why the migration failed."
"The solution should be advanced to fit with the container constantly."
"The product's pricing could be less expensive compared to other competitors."
"IBM PowerVM could improve the price because it is expensive."
"The hardware licensing model could be improved because the licensing model is a bit different from the standard hardware procured."
"Any improvements that can be made in the interface will go a long way to helping us work better."
"IBM should review the price of this solution in my opinion; it is too high."
"As understand it, IBM sells all its hardware to Lenovo, and only PCs servers are managed by IBM. It's uncertain how much longer IBM will continue in this way, especially with the current trend of transitioning from on-premises to cloud and hybrid models. The market is evolving. Given this market shift, it's essential to identify areas for improvement. IBM has introduced the PowerVM Series, including Linux, which is a positive step. However, customers are already moving towards x86 servers due to cost considerations. The cost of PowerVM compared to x86 servers appears to be a significant factor."
"I don't know whether this has been trialed already, but IBM should give us an alert when we reach seven or eight failovers so that we can automatically switch it to manual mode. That would be great because if we cross the 10-day licensing limit, we have to pay a hefty license cost to Oracle. If IBM could view that feature, it would be helpful in license compliance."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 134 reviews while IBM PowerVM is ranked 9th in Server Virtualization Software with 25 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 8.0, while IBM PowerVM is rated 8.4. 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 IBM PowerVM writes "A stable system for high-end data processing with a great support structure". Hyper-V is most compared with VMware vSphere, VMware Workstation, Proxmox VE, KVM and OpenVZ, whereas IBM PowerVM is most compared with VMware vSphere, KVM, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), Oracle VM VirtualBox and Proxmox VE. See our Hyper-V vs. IBM PowerVM 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.