We performed a comparison between Hyper-V and RHEV 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."It is a stable product."
"It is definitely the toughest competitor for VMware. It easily increases memory for our virtual machines."
"The solution allows us to take advantage of our physical environment."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"We appreciate how easy this solution is to implement on standalone severs."
"My understanding is it's easy to set up."
"Hyper-V provided freedom to spin up development and test environments. As projects were created, an environment could be created and applied."
"It's a very manageable product."
"Stability and speed are the most valuable aspects."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support portal."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is the popularity of the OS."
"The most valuable feature of Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization is its pricing."
"Red Hat is the most stable system."
"RHEV’s cost is much less compared to VMware."
"The solution is stable."
"The price is the solution's most valuable aspect. It's much cheaper than, for example, VMware."
"We have our cluster connected to a Dell EMC VNX (SAN). The Hyper-V nodes are on Cisco UCS blades, and everything is interconnected via fiber. I attempted to use a virtual Fibre Channel connection to present a SAN volume to a VM but was not able to make that work."
"If a person has never implemented the solution before, they might find the process difficult."
"It would be nice if they provided a free management console that we could use to manage all of the hosts for no additional fee."
"We would like to have a cloning function added to this product."
"An improvement I suggest is having more guest operating systems."
"Hyper-V is hosted on OS but if your OS scratches you are in big trouble. In addition, if a host fails, automatically the machine and the virtual machine should boot from another source. Those type of features would benefit Hyper-V."
"There are some storage problems which do occur in high load systems, especially SQL workloads."
"The corrupted volume is a problem."
"The documentation is not as good as it should be."
"It lags behind in that you need to go to something like Fedora to get all the extra bells and whistles."
"We hope that Red Hat can produce a paradigm edition. We are looking for paradigm computing and paradigm storage. Its scalability can be improved. It is not easy to scale, and we hope that Red Hat can provide a more scalable system. They should also provide local service and support. Our customers are looking for a good software vendor to provide professional services."
"With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected."
"The solution has a very small lifecycle."
"This solution could be more secure."
"There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference."
"When we do a direct comparison, then obviously VMware does better in terms of having Fault Tolerance and doing active disaster recovery and these kind of things. This is something that can be improved within Red Hat."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 134 reviews while RHEV is ranked 10th in Server Virtualization Software with 32 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 8.0, while RHEV is rated 7.6. 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 RHEV writes "Offers frameworks with well-documented API and easy to use". Hyper-V is most compared with VMware vSphere, VMware Workstation, Proxmox VE, KVM and IBM PowerVM, whereas RHEV is most compared with VMware vSphere, KVM, Proxmox VE, Oracle VM and Nutanix AHV Virtualization. See our Hyper-V vs. RHEV 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.