We performed a comparison between Hyper-V and Proxmox VE based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Hyper-V and Proxmox VE seem to have a more or less rating among users regarding ease of deployment, pricing, and service and support. In terms of features, users of Hyper-V weren’t satisfied with the recovery capabilities and the instability if the stack became bloated. On the other hand, users of Proxmox VE didn’t like the need to update manually but felt that the solution was young. Therefore, the bugs they experienced will hopefully have a solution with a future update.
"I find that most of the competition is more or less the same. However, Hyper-V is, when you compare it to the older platforms like VMware, a little bit more advanced at this stage."
"The solution is stable and the cost is reasonable."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to integrate the Hyper-Visor center from one console."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The most valuable feature of Hyper-V is that it's very intuitive."
"It helps us build servers."
"The virtualization aspect of the solution functions similar to VMware is one of its most valuable features…It is a stable product."
"The initial setup is not difficult at all. It is very easy."
"The solution's maintenance part was very easy."
"The initial setup was really straightforward and easy."
"We can access the product from iPhone 7. It is stable and easy."
"The most valuable feature of Proxmox VE is the speed. Additionally, I can modify the solution if needed because it is open-source and the integration of any kind of API and monitoring is hassle-free."
"We now have the ability to quickly build and deploy VM desktops for application testing with the snapshot ability to rollback, as required."
"Saves a lot of time compared to imaging physical desktops."
"One of the standout features of Proxmox VE is its meticulously crafted web user interface, which is not only highly efficient but also exceptionally clear and user-friendly."
"It allows us to create an individual VM along with the GPU for machine learning."
"The only negative thing I heard was that the baseline price is very, very attractive relative to VMware, however, the vCenter counterpart, the thing that brings it all together, is quite pricey."
"It should be deployed with OS so there is no need to install OS separately, only select the OS and get it ready."
"VLAN is not very easy to configure."
"There is a problem with high-availability if the load is too high."
"ometimes a server or machine shuts down and doesn't automatically restart."
"The solution could improve by having virtual restore."
"I think there is room for improvement in terms of the cloud solutions."
"The interface could be more user friendly. In addition, the documentation and security could use improvement."
"The scalability could be better."
"This solution needs a more flexible and efficient backup solution in the dashboard."
"We had some challenges with management including volume and storage management. Setting it up properly and making it work, specifically shared storage between the virtual machines, is difficult."
"It is a good solution, but it is very complicated in some ways. It is not easy. You must have experience in the console mode to do some configurations. A lot of documentation and YouTube videos are available that you can use to learn about it."
"There should be a helm feature for managing Kubernetes ports directly from the Proxmox traffic interface."
"We have only command lines for a management application to remove sites. The solution needs a proper GUI."
"Backup and recovery could be better. It's a bit problematic. If you're not well-versed with Linux, it tends to be a bit of a challenge when setting up and recovering. It's not really GUI-based, and if you're not a good Linux user, it becomes a bit difficult. In the next release, I would like to have something like Hyper-V's Data Protection Manager, where you could do an offsite backup and keep a copy. I haven't seen that incorporated yet, but I'm sure they will do that."
"A feature which should be added is the ability to encrypt the main installation."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 134 reviews while Proxmox VE is ranked 1st in Server Virtualization Software with 58 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 8.0, while Proxmox VE is rated 8.6. 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 Proxmox VE writes "Easy to use and supports multi-monitors on multiple VMs in KVM". Hyper-V is most compared with VMware vSphere, VMware Workstation, KVM, Oracle VM VirtualBox and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas Proxmox VE is most compared with VMware vSphere, Oracle VM VirtualBox, KVM, Nutanix AHV Virtualization and Citrix Hypervisor. See our Hyper-V vs. Proxmox VE 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.