We performed a comparison between Hyper-V and IBM PowerVM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Server Virtualization Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The support with Microsoft is great."
"The solution has good scalability."
"There are two very good things about this product including licensing and stability."
"The interface is quite good."
"It is good for small installations."
"I value the simplicity of configuration because it has worked as expected for my client."
"It is actually very low on resources. It doesn't use many resources. It is also very easy to tailor. You can change things like the amount of memory and storage on the fly. It is very stable and reliable. I like its replication feature, which is very good. It is also very easy to move the virtual machines across push servers without any difficulty. Its performance is also very good. Now with this pandemic, a lot of workers are working from home. A lot of workers have been using laptops as their desktop computers, and they would remote into a virtual PC. There is no difficulty, and they can't tell the difference between this and the real one. It is much easier to manage."
"With each update, the security of this solution just gets better and better. It is very stable."
"The most valuable features in this solution are you do not get degradation in the performance like you could get in other solutions. There is a physical adapter that is better than a virtual one and you can assign adapters to a VM."
"It is a stable solution with reliable performance."
"The stability is the most valuable aspect of this solution. IBM is the most powerful and stable platform."
"IBM PowerVM's most valuable feature is stability."
"What I like about this solution, is that it is easy to configure."
"You can increase resources with it automatically."
"The feature that I like most is the versatility."
"The tool's performance is top-notch."
"Failure capabilities are insufficient for disaster recovery."
"I am using this solution with E-Notes. I heard that there will be future improvements in integration of the E-notes systems. This would be very helpful."
"Microsoft tech support is horrible."
"We have our cluster connected to a Dell EMC VNX (SAN). The Hyper-V nodes are on Cisco UCS blades, and everything is interconnected via fiber. I attempted to use a virtual Fibre Channel connection to present a SAN volume to a VM but was not able to make that work."
"The corrupted volume is a problem."
"The solution could improve by having virtual restore."
"Hyper-V requires improvement with manageability."
"I would love to see other options for connecting VMs to large data storage."
"To make it a ten, I would like for them to add automation and configuration tools in order to help use the manager."
"The performance should be improved."
"If it could actually virtualize the entire platform it might be better. If you're having more than one virtualization technology, maybe there's a way to actually have less - one technology to run the data center and maybe one special virtualization for power. If it integrated with other platforms more effectively it might be better."
"The licensing could be better."
"IBM should review the price of this solution in my opinion; it is too high."
"IBM PowerVM could improve the price because it is expensive."
"I don't know whether this has been trialed already, but IBM should give us an alert when we reach seven or eight failovers so that we can automatically switch it to manual mode. That would be great because if we cross the 10-day licensing limit, we have to pay a hefty license cost to Oracle. If IBM could view that feature, it would be helpful in license compliance."
"As understand it, IBM sells all its hardware to Lenovo, and only PCs servers are managed by IBM. It's uncertain how much longer IBM will continue in this way, especially with the current trend of transitioning from on-premises to cloud and hybrid models. The market is evolving. Given this market shift, it's essential to identify areas for improvement. IBM has introduced the PowerVM Series, including Linux, which is a positive step. However, customers are already moving towards x86 servers due to cost considerations. The cost of PowerVM compared to x86 servers appears to be a significant factor."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 132 reviews while IBM PowerVM is ranked 9th in Server Virtualization Software with 25 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 8.0, while IBM PowerVM is rated 8.4. 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 IBM PowerVM writes "A stable system for high-end data processing with a great support structure". Hyper-V is most compared with VMware vSphere, VMware Workstation, Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox and OpenVZ, whereas IBM PowerVM is most compared with VMware vSphere, KVM, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Proxmox VE and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI). See our Hyper-V vs. IBM PowerVM 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.