We performed a comparison between Citrix Hypervisor and Hyper-V based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Citrix Hypervisor comes out on top in this comparison. According to reviews, it appears to be a more secure and lightweight solution than Hyper-V.
"Installing Hypervisor is really simple. It's the simplest setup I've ever done before. We used a team to deploy it, and it doesn't take much time, like two or three hours tops."
"The solution is extremely stable."
"The ability to move a virtual machine while it is running is a big advantage."
"I've found the following features to be the most valuable: user personalization layer, app layering, provisioning, and notification services for integration between different domains."
"The compatibility of the solution is its most valuable feature. It's compatible on almost every cloud these days."
"Citrix Hypervisor is quick to deploy and easy to manage."
"Citrix Hypervisor does a great job overall, such as the virtualization of the host. It's very easy to manage the virtual machine, to create, and configure high availability."
"Ability to move your virtual machines from one host to another."
"The performance is very good."
"The solution is easy to configure."
"The initial setup of Hyper-V is far easier than VMware."
"Hyper-V's technical support is good - they're responsive and sort cases based on criticality and category, so they get dealt with quickly and by the correct team."
"It's a very manageable product."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"My understanding is it's easy to set up."
"We appreciate how easy this solution is to implement on standalone severs."
"The main problem with Citrix Hypervisor is getting readily available backup solutions for it. It would be wonderful if Hypervisor were better integrated with third-party backup solutions."
"It needs to have a more robust backup solution."
"There are several areas that need improvement including the stability of the networking stack and networking management."
"The solution needs better backup facilities that are available for virtual machines to create servers on."
"I find that the features in Citrix Hypervisor are not as rich as with VMware. It would be a benefit if they had some of the other features VMware has, such as the ability to expand a drive on the fly. You do not have to take down the machine to do it but in Citrix you do."
"Citrix Hypervisor is expensive if you get it as a stand-alone product, so this is one area for improvement. Its price could be cheaper. We also found other areas for improvement in Citrix Hypervisor, for example, we can't use SCIM provisioning, and there are limitations to the size of the HDD. Another area for improvement is the pass-through storage, in particular the removable storage, because that also has limitations where you can't connect to the drive if it is more than one TB."
"The solution should be more flexible and allow for greater customization."
"Integration with other vendors and other applications could be improved."
"The technical support is good but it could improve by being faster."
"The Hyper-V management console could be improved to make it easier. It should be a little bit more granular. Various virtual switches could also be improved to make virtual desk management slightly better. The replication could be improved slightly. The checkpoints or snapshots could be improved to make it a bit more transparent to the user."
"I have found it difficult to manage more than one virtual machine."
"Hyper-V could benefit with improvements to their management interface."
"One of the network problems I face is I cannot introduce other security layers on top of Hyper-V as you can in VMware. When it comes to the network the VMware is more flexible than Hyper-V."
"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."
"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."
"The product can be a bit difficult to use."
Citrix Hypervisor is ranked 7th in Server Virtualization Software with 14 reviews while Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 46 reviews. Citrix Hypervisor is rated 8.4, while Hyper-V is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Citrix Hypervisor writes "The ability to move a VM while it is still running and continue doing maintenance work is a big advantage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Hyper-V writes "It's a low-cost solution that enabled us to shrink everything down into a single server ". Citrix Hypervisor is most compared with Proxmox VE, VMware vSphere, KVM, Oracle VM VirtualBox and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas Hyper-V is most compared with VMware vSphere, Proxmox VE, VMware Workstation, Oracle VM VirtualBox and Nutanix AHV Virtualization. See our Citrix Hypervisor vs. Hyper-V 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.
