We performed a comparison between Hyper-V and Nutanix AHV Virtualization based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Hyper-V came out on top in this comparison. It is easy to manage and customize, and has very low resource usage, resulting in very little downtime. It is robust, stable, and provides many desired next-generation features. As a Microsoft product, it integrates well with many solutions in the Microsoft ecosystem, in addition to many other popular third-party solutions.
"Hyper-V deployment is very user-friendly. It supports partial scripting and offers a UI for a smooth experience. There's also PowerShell scripting available for advanced users."
"It is a great advantage for any company that is using a Microsoft Windows server."
"It helps us build servers."
"It is an affordable platform."
"The solution is very user-friendly."
"The interface is quite good."
"We appreciate how easy this solution is to implement on standalone severs."
"Using cluster with Hyper-V had a major impact on our protection environment. So all applications were virtualized using Hyper-V."
"Nutanix AHV Virtualization is a private cloud platform offering integration with various public cloud providers. This integration allows for a multi-cloud approach. In my opinion, Nutanix AHV Virtualization's strength is its storage. It innovates and excels in the hyper-converged storage segment, making it the number one choice in this area."
"I would rate the stability a ten out of ten."
"Nutanix is good for new implementations on the VM side. It's very good for disaster recovery and final storage."
"If we want to move the virtual machine from one host to another, it's simple, straightforward, and stable."
"The solution is stable."
"It's user-friendly."
"It is the simple non-consideration we get with this product that's great. It just works."
"The most valuable feature of Nutanix AHV Virtualization is the user-friendly environment. The integration, implementation, and training for the solution are good."
"There is a hard limitation of 20 gigs per file with Dropbox, so you've got to overcome that by chunking the zip files into something smaller and manageable."
"Sometimes there's a bit of slowness in the VMs."
"We'd like a template feature to help deploy VMs quickly."
"In my opinion, it would have been better to truncate the site-to-site replication."
"Hyper-V could benefit with improvements to their management interface."
"I think the setup for the Virtual Network Manager could be improved."
"The backup site could be better. We used to face a lot of issues, and we are looking to solve that now. We are in the process of moving all the infrastructure to the cloud. It could also use more integration on the management part. We also need more integration on the monitoring sites."
"They can hot add NICs to the VMs. However, there is still not the ability to hot add virtual processors to running VMs."
"Honestly, there's a lot to work on the product, especially for someone like me who has worked on VMware. VMware offers a significant level of customization when configuring virtual machines, and that level of detail is not as pronounced on Nutanix AHV Virtualization."
"It's not a very scalable product."
"A lot of tasks cannot be performed using the GUI, the graphical interface."
"To face no complications in our company, we had to switch off virtual machines one after the other before heading to Nutanix platform and going to edge services to switch off and turn off everything, making it a challenging process for me."
"I would like to see better decompression or degrouping of the VMs so that we can use a single number of SQLs with two servers. We don't need a huge number of DXSPs."
"If we have to opt for a high level of capacity planning and need more analytics—like deciding on new purchases or budgeting, or if we need additional resources in the near future—we need to pay for Prism Central. I would suggest that Nutanix improve a bit on the analytics part of Prism Element so we can calculate those kinds of things within that flavor."
"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 room for improvement in the USB mapping."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 30 reviews while Nutanix AHV Virtualization is ranked 6th in Server Virtualization Software with 30 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 8.0, while Nutanix AHV Virtualization is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Hyper-V writes "Enables the creation of secure, isolated virtual environments for running applications and allows seamless transfer of virtual machines between nodes without impacting users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nutanix AHV Virtualization writes "Lightweight, integrates well, and the technical support is responsive". Hyper-V is most compared with VMware vSphere, VMware Workstation, Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox and Citrix Hypervisor, whereas Nutanix AHV Virtualization is most compared with Proxmox VE, VMware vSphere, KVM, Citrix Hypervisor and Oracle VM. See our Hyper-V vs. Nutanix AHV Virtualization 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.