We performed a comparison between Nutanix AHV 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: The two solutions are comparable and receive similar ratings in most categories. However, users feel that Proxmox VE is more affordable than Nutanix AHV.
"Nutanix AHV virtualization requires little disk size for a huge number of servers. We can do everything from a single dashboard, monitoring performance, and single-task boxes."
"Nutanix AHV Virtualization has good performance and can be used for backup and disaster."
"The most valuable feature is the integration between storage and compute services."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is that you don't need to pay for it, it's free, as opposed to paying for a VMware license."
"Nutanix's customer support is good, one of its biggest selling points."
"In terms of features, Acropolis is a good virtualization manager and that it is on-premise. I use almost every technology they provide."
"The storage features and volume system are great."
"We use Prism Central, the centralized management console for AHV clusters. It allows administrators to manage multiple clusters from a single interface and provides a unified view of the entire infrastructure."
"The ability to back up a host and keep it running is valuable."
"Saves a lot of time compared to imaging physical desktops."
"The initial setup was really straightforward and easy."
"The affordability of the solution is the product's most valuable aspect."
"Ease of use, HA, internal 100gbps Virtio network, built-in backup (don't pay $1200 Veeam licence), support for multi-monitors on multiple VMs in KVM, no need to RDP in the VMs to do your stuff (Win, Linux and Mac with SPICE and using 6 screens here (11520*2160)."
"It is easy to deploy."
"We had issues with this solution when it comes to resources. We have officially created four to five PMs and it just continues to make more resources even though they are delivered in the main post mode."
"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."
"It would be better if the solution's replication to another site could be efficiently optimized."
"The price of Nutanix AHV Virtualization could improve."
"Although AHV has many advantages, some drawbacks need to be mentioned. Compared to established hypervisors like VMware ESXi or Microsoft Hyper-V, AHV has a limited ecosystem and smaller community support."
"Adding even more integrations would be an improvement."
"The solution should work to improve its stability."
"I would like to see more automation of Day One operations, such as DRS, and HA."
"Some companies do not support AHV."
"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."
"The documentation in Proxmox VE could improve."
"I can't speak to any improvements. It is not lacking features."
"The solution needs a better billing system."
"If this solution could import directly from OVS format then it would make migration much easier."
"Backup and recovery could be better. It's a bit problematic. If you're not well-versed with Linux, it tends to be a bit of a challenge when setting up and recovering. It's not really GUI-based, and if you're not a good Linux user, it becomes a bit difficult. In the next release, I would like to have something like Hyper-V's Data Protection Manager, where you could do an offsite backup and keep a copy. I haven't seen that incorporated yet, but I'm sure they will do that."
"The availability of the solution could be a bit better."
"I would like to see more monitoring in the next release of this solution."
"The scalability could be better."
Nutanix AHV Virtualization is ranked 6th in Server Virtualization Software with 48 reviews while Proxmox VE is ranked 1st in Server Virtualization Software with 58 reviews. Nutanix AHV Virtualization is rated 8.6, while Proxmox VE is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Nutanix AHV Virtualization writes "Lightweight, integrates well, and the technical support is responsive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Proxmox VE writes "Easy to use and supports multi-monitors on multiple VMs in KVM". Nutanix AHV Virtualization is most compared with Hyper-V, VMware vSphere, KVM, Citrix Hypervisor and RHEV, whereas Proxmox VE is most compared with VMware vSphere, Oracle VM VirtualBox, KVM, Hyper-V and Citrix Hypervisor. See our Nutanix AHV Virtualization vs. Proxmox VE 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.