We performed a comparison between Hyper-V and VMware VSphere 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 the winner in this comparison. It is easy to deploy, reliable, robust, and has excellent customer support. Hyper-V does come out on top in the pricing category, however.
"The most valuable features are ease of use, and it gets the job done in a straightforward manner."
"I like the functionality."
"The solution is stable."
"I have found the GUI user-friendly and having the solution be a Windows application makes it familiar to users."
"The product is easy to manage. It improves our VM management."
"Hyper-V improved the infrastructure drastically, not only from a performance perspective but from a control/administration view as well."
"It is good for small installations."
"This solution is much easier to manage than a bare metal machine. It is so easy to manage something through the virtual machine."
"We use it for our VDI infrastructure and managing virtual machines."
"Server Virtualization is the most important feature because that helps me to utilize 100% capacity of my physical server or box. Its redundancy, uptime, or high-availability is also valuable. Storage-sharing is also valuable. In vSAN, I can utilize the maximum storage. In the physical boxes, if you don't require storage, it lies idle, but with VMware or any kind of virtualization, you can utilize the full storage."
"It cuts down on hardware costs by being able to virtualize multiple hardware and multiple machines on a single piece of hardware."
"It stands out as a comprehensive and advantageous solution, providing a full package that effectively caters to our needs for managing our private cloud."
"VMware vSphere has helped us create our infrastructures and provide services for our customers."
"It affords us different views of the VMs created by vSphere so we can control them better."
"It's extremely simple. Installing the ESXi is a piece of cake and then putting servers on there is really simple and having HA and building a cluster for our VM servers. It's very easy."
"For me, the most valuable feature would be the EVC, but EVC has been changed to be per-VM which makes it possible for us to migrate the VMs to cloud and not take into account what hardware they're running on. Also, a big improvement from the previous version is that I'm now able to schedule backup for the VCSA. That is, in my opinion, a huge improvement. The last thing that I think is really great is, I'm not able to boot the OS and not the entire server. That's going to save me a lot of time."
"We'd like a template feature to help deploy VMs quickly."
"We've had many issues with Hyper-V's stability, including resource crunches and memory leakage."
"The solution could improve by having virtual restore."
"The interface could be more user friendly. In addition, the documentation and security could use improvement."
"Hyper-V's management platform falls short in terms of scalability, especially when handling multiple Hyper-V servers. VMware has a central console to pull in all your VM servers, so you can easily manage them all through one console. You can manage servers in Hyper-V's admin centers, but it's not as scalable. It's doable with a couple of Hyper-V servers, but it becomes harder to manage when you get over two or three Hyper-V servers."
"In general, based on my little experience with Hyper-V, I see a lot of obstacles. I think it falls behind the other competitors."
"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."
"We would like to have a cloning function added to this product."
"It could use a smaller learning curve."
"It could be more scalable."
"I would like to see AI in future releases."
"An improvement could be allowing a "dark mode" for the interface. I think the HTML5 client is a little bit hard to read. It's all white. It's a little bit bright on the eyes. A lot of us IT guys view in the dark."
"The initial setup could be better. It manages all the setups, but it's not very straightforward, and it takes time."
"In future releases, I would like to see less pricing. The license can be improved."
"I think the pricing could be lower, and the technical support could be improved."
"VMware vSphere could be improved with cheaper costs."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 134 reviews while VMware vSphere is ranked 2nd in Server Virtualization Software with 446 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 8.0, while VMware vSphere is rated 8.8. 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 VMware vSphere writes "Offers good performance and is useful for banking systems". Hyper-V is most compared with VMware Workstation, Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox, KVM and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas VMware vSphere is most compared with Proxmox VE, VMware Workstation, Oracle VM, KVM and Nutanix AHV Virtualization. See our Hyper-V 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.