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.
"My understanding is it's easy to set up."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"The product is easy to manage. It improves our VM management."
"This solution is much easier to manage than a bare metal machine. It is so easy to manage something through the virtual machine."
"It is a very stable product. We have not had any issues with Hyper-V crashing itself."
"The most valuable feature of Hyper-V is the replica service."
"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 allows for quick deployment of servers and workloads."
"Nutanix AHV is very scalable. It can go to unlimited nodes."
"With AHV, you can run micro-segmentation, which is, on the network security level, to have network virtualization across clouds."
"The most valuable feature is the integration between storage and compute services."
"Nutanix's customer support is good, one of its biggest selling points."
"Simplicity is the most valuable feature."
"It has a vs switch for the people who know Linux, in case it's easier for them to use AHV than it is to use VMware."
"You don't need any other instruments for control, AHV. You only need to look at the prism to control all infrastructure."
"The solution is stable."
"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."
"Failure capabilities are insufficient for disaster recovery."
"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."
"I think there is room for improvement in terms of the cloud solutions."
"I think the console could use some improvement for the backups."
"The weakness of Hyper-V is in its interaction with iSCSI protocols."
"VMware has antivirus protection that covers the entire VM. If Microsoft could have something similar to this in Hyper-V, that would be great."
"SCVMM needs to be more user-friendly. Without SCVMM, automating is not easy to use and we look forward to the upcoming versions of SCVMM becoming simpler and more admin friendly."
"They need to work on the deployment of virtual machines. They need to streamline the process of templates and deploying virtual machines."
"The solution could improve the call logging system to HPE, it is a bit tedious."
"The integration capabilities of Nutanix AHV Virtualization is an area with certain shortcomings that need improvement."
"In the next release of this solution, I would like to see support for containerization."
"The solution is very expensive."
"The solution should work to improve its stability."
"The solution can be pricey."
"It should focus on providing more detailed and helpful error messages. One area we'd like to see enhanced is better support for guest VMs, especially in a heterogeneous environment."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 134 reviews while Nutanix AHV Virtualization is ranked 6th in Server Virtualization Software with 45 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 8.0, while Nutanix AHV Virtualization is rated 8.6. 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 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, KVM and Citrix Hypervisor, whereas Nutanix AHV Virtualization is most compared with Proxmox VE, VMware vSphere, KVM, Citrix Hypervisor and RHEV. 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.