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.
"I would rate the stability a ten out of ten."
"The solution is user-friendly and provides good virtual machine backups. The user interface gets updated when there is a new release."
"Nutanix AHV's most valuable feature is NetFlow."
"The most valuable feature is the integration between storage and compute services."
"This product stands out for its user-friendly interface, intuitive design, and responsive UI. It offers AVH features comparable to Nutanix but at a more cost-effective price point."
"Nutanix AHV Virtualization has good performance and can be used for backup and disaster."
"With AHV, you can run micro-segmentation, which is, on the network security level, to have network virtualization across clouds."
"This solution is very stable and it has been running for the last three months, with no issues."
"Its most valuable features are reliability, for sure, and quickness in getting the job done. I can spin off 100 or 200 machines in the matter of half an hour."
"Stability and scalability are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The tool provides 99.99% uptime."
"The initial setup is very easy and takes half an hour to complete."
"For me, the most valuable feature would be the EVC, but EVC has been changed to be per-VM which makes it possible for us to migrate the VMs to cloud and not take into account what hardware they're running on. Also, a big improvement from the previous version is that I'm now able to schedule backup for the VCSA. That is, in my opinion, a huge improvement. The last thing that I think is really great is, I'm not able to boot the OS and not the entire server. That's going to save me a lot of time."
"The scalability of the solution is good. You can scale up to maximum levels."
"We saved a lot of time and hardware with this solution. It also prevents fewer incidents."
"The feature that I find very valuable is the ability to move images of virtual machines from different workspaces to other workspaces between different installations."
"It should focus on providing more detailed and helpful error messages. One area we'd like to see enhanced is better support for guest VMs, especially in a heterogeneous environment."
"The licensing costs are a little bit expensive."
"I would like to see more automation of Day One operations, such as DRS, and HA."
"The management console needs to improve to make it easier for administrators. For example, to be able to reorganize our VMs, folders, and subfolders, similarly as it is provided in VMware. We can sort, manage, and organize VMs, folders, or subfolders in VMware."
"There are times when consultants, construction, or building firms need to use Beam but it can be difficult."
"In the next release of this solution, I would like to see support for containerization."
"A lot of tasks cannot be performed using the GUI, the graphical interface."
"If you want to install a specific operating system, you must first check to see if it is listed in the compatibility list; only then will you be able to install it, and that is one issue for now."
"Reporting on vCenter needs to be improved."
"They can lower the price of its license."
"As we introduce the DevOps culture, we need to make sure that the principles and tools used to support this approach can be easily integrated and interoperated with the vSphere environment with no (or less) redundancy in tools and functionality."
"I would like to see AI in future releases."
"The solution could be cheaper and less expensive."
"OS templates should be readily available, so there is no need to get an OS separately. Only the activation part should be different, which is not presently available due to the need to get the OS from a different location, then create VMs."
"Sometimes you can't find items and you need to log onto different physical servers to do technical tasks. I don't fully understand why this is the case."
"I would like to see a more automated upgrade, where you take the other products into account, so you can upgrade the entire VMware stack from a single interface."
Nutanix AHV Virtualization is ranked 6th in Server Virtualization Software with 44 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.
