We performed a comparison between Nutanix AHV and Proxmox VE based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: The two solutions are comparable and receive similar ratings in most categories. However, users feel that Proxmox VE is more affordable than Nutanix AHV.
"Using AHV, we have a built-in VR solution. It operates using a reduplication-based unique package transfer process."
"The most valuable feature is the integration between storage and compute services."
"The initial setup of Nutanix AHV Virtualization is straightforward."
"With AHV, you can run micro-segmentation, which is, on the network security level, to have network virtualization across clouds."
"Nutanix AHV's most valuable feature is NetFlow."
"The storage features and volume system are great."
"The most valuable part of Nutanix is its centralized management of everything."
"The solution is stable."
"The affordability of the solution is the product's most valuable aspect."
"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 had issues with this solution when it comes to resources. We have officially created four to five PMs and it just continues to make more resources even though they are delivered in the main post mode."
"You can easily migrate VMs between hosts."
"Less infrastructure required; simple to use."
"The ability to back up a host and keep it running is valuable."
"Proxmox allows us to achieve affordable performance while keeping high levels of data protection and flexibility."
"In addition to the virtualization, the firewall and the routing functions that it provides are valuable."
"Lacks integration with the cloud or other solutions."
"My storage use is doubled; if I am creating a one TB virtual machine then my storage policy will take two TB from my cluster."
"There is no web interface with AHV."
"The licensing costs are a little bit expensive."
"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."
"There are some issues with the interface and integration."
"There is room for improvement in the USB mapping."
"The solution could improve the call logging system to HPE, it is a bit tedious."
"There should be a helm feature for managing Kubernetes ports directly from the Proxmox traffic interface."
"The initial setup has a pretty steep learning curve."
"It's one of those things for me to move things on to the cloud. It's not so easy. I am always on the laptop and have to monitor that because if you want to make strides; you need to stay online."
"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."
"The only disadvantage of Proxmox VE is that it is a young solution so it does have some bugs."
"We are using servers individually, and we are looking for a reliable application that allows us to hop between servers with high availability."
"Proxmox VE can improve the management of virtual discs. For example, if my virtual disc is 200 GB and I want to decrease it is not easy. I have to do a lot of things to decrease the size of existing virtual machines. If the Proxmox VE team can make it easy for customers to instantly increase or decrease the virtual machine hard disc, it will be very helpful for me. However, the containers I can do it easily."
"It would be nice to have total CPU and RAM allocations show for all VMs/CTs to avoid overloading an individual hypervisor."
Nutanix AHV Virtualization is ranked 6th in Server Virtualization Software with 46 reviews while Proxmox VE is ranked 1st in Server Virtualization Software with 58 reviews. Nutanix AHV Virtualization is rated 8.6, while Proxmox VE is rated 8.6. 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 Proxmox VE writes "Easy to use and supports multi-monitors on multiple VMs in KVM". Nutanix AHV Virtualization is most compared with Hyper-V, VMware vSphere, KVM, Citrix Hypervisor and RHEV, whereas Proxmox VE is most compared with VMware vSphere, Oracle VM VirtualBox, KVM, Hyper-V and Citrix Hypervisor. See our Nutanix AHV Virtualization 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.