We performed a comparison between VMware vSphere 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: VMware vSphere is highly regarded for its extensive range of features, user-friendly interface, and scalability. However, users want improved backup features, integration capabilities, and documentation. Proxmox VE is valued for its simplicity, ease of use, and cost-effectiveness. Users recommend automating certain processes, enhancing the user interface and documentation, and addressing compatibility.
"Less infrastructure required; simple to use."
"The whole solution is good. It has good tools that help me in managing the servers. It is also stable."
"The solution is stable."
"Proxmox VE has many containers. You need to download the image and do basic configuration, after which it is operational within a few minutes. The solution provides many containers that are light in use and don't use a lot of memory. You don't have to spend a lot of resources."
"The initial setup was really straightforward and easy."
"It is a community-based solution."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is migration."
"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."
"The fact that we have the ability to easily scale out, and the ability to do maintenance on the underlying hardware without impacting our business applications, are important aspects."
"Tech support is very knowledgeable."
"Has many good features, and is stable and reliable."
"In the past, we struggled with VM encryption. We couldn't encrypt the virtual machines with older versions of vSphere without some kind of third-party tool. Now, with 6.7, it's all in the application itself, in vSphere. We no longer have to procure additional products to meet that requirement. We can just do it on the fly, and pass our audit with no issues."
"The technical support is good and they are available over the internet."
"Most valuable features are quick provisioning, High Availability, and DRS for balancing workload."
"The roadmap for the product itself covers all of the features that we are looking for."
"The benefit of the solution is that you can create template-based servers within minutes. If you were to use a physical server, it would probably take several hours, if not a whole day, to get everything set up the way you need."
"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."
"The initial setup has a pretty steep learning curve."
"If this solution could import directly from OVS format then it would make migration much easier."
"Its performance and support can be improved. Currently, there is a cost for support."
"The solution can be improved by making it more secure and scalable."
"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."
"Proxmox needs to improve the integration of its network, machines, and virtual machines."
"Separate physical network for Corosync/Heartbeat should be emphasized in the Quick Start or Getting Started documentation."
"It would be useful to have features like micro-segmentation, changing the mix as well as part of vSphere"
"The Web Client is too slow."
"There should be more stability in the updates. They had an issue with the last release."
"In the past, little changes have broken things in vSphere. Going from 6.0, which worked perfectly fine on the Mac Pro, there were certain changes in hardware drivers, when 6.5 came out. Some were no longer present or had been deprecated. As a result, it didn't work on the Mac Pro anymore, which was business critical."
"Where I think there is room for improvement is in the HTML5 interface in vCenter. What it lacks, for me, is integrating to VMware's other products, especially NSX."
"VMware vSphere could improve on the automation features and the ease of use of the solution in many areas, such as the interface. However, VMware is doing lots of great things."
"I'd like to see a little bit more integration for VDI. I think that Composer servers, security servers, broker servers with connections, I'm not sure they are necessary at this point. Perhaps they could have a lot of those functions baked directly into the hypervisor. It seems to me that if the hypervisor is scalable and flexible enough, that the processor and compute can handle all of that. Maybe we eliminate those other components for VDIs and have more mixed workloads: server workloads and desktop workloads all in the same hypervisor."
"In the next release, I would love to have Java as a service, platform as a service, and container as a service."
Proxmox VE is ranked 1st in Server Virtualization Software with 58 reviews while VMware vSphere is ranked 2nd in Server Virtualization Software with 446 reviews. Proxmox VE is rated 8.6, while VMware vSphere is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Proxmox VE writes "Easy to use and supports multi-monitors on multiple VMs in KVM". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware vSphere writes "Offers good performance and is useful for banking systems". Proxmox VE is most compared with Oracle VM VirtualBox, KVM, Nutanix AHV Virtualization, Hyper-V and Citrix Hypervisor, whereas VMware vSphere is most compared with Hyper-V, Oracle VM, VMware Workstation, KVM and Nutanix AHV Virtualization. See our Proxmox VE 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.
rate limit
rate limit