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.
"Scripting can automate procedures."
"Citrix Hypervisor integrates easily and I can manage the infrastructure better. If I need to take a machine down to expand the hard drive, I do not have to physically be here. I do not need to order new equipment or new hard drives. I can shut it down, increase the drive space and bring it back up."
"The onboarding process is pretty straightforward."
"We find there are good central maintenance and central management panels."
"What I like the most is the support of the GPU Graphics and the VM Live migration."
"The continued uptime of our virtual machines is good."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The solution's security is its most valuable aspect."
"The virtualization aspect of the solution functions similar to VMware is one of its most valuable features…It is a stable product."
"It is good for small installations."
"The solution has good scalability."
"I have found the GUI user-friendly and having the solution be a Windows application makes it familiar to users."
"It is easy to use, and it is stable. It is a good solution."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"There are some products that you can mount over Hyper-V that provide the features that, in today's Hyper-V, are not present."
"It makes it easier to deploy service. All service tends to migrate onto the server house without having problems now. It is hardware independent."
"The USB support for the virtual server needs improvement."
"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 can be useful to have a web management program because we have to install our client-server. We have to properly manage the host, if we had administration tools through a web interface it would be a benefit."
"Citrix could provide more tools to help the client manage the solution because we need to build our own tools in some cases. Everything is available through PowerShell, but then you need to build your own scripts to do the more advanced work."
"The graphics user interface is pretty bad."
"The licensing costs are too high on the solution. They should work to make the costs more reasonable."
"Integration with other vendors and other applications could be improved."
"The built-in networking features are a little limited."
"It would be nice if they provided a free management console that we could use to manage all of the hosts for no additional fee."
"Hyper-V isn't a lightweight solution like VMware. Management could be more straightforward. Even as far as disk management tools are concerned, it would be better if that could be made simpler. The same applies to performance."
"There's room for improvement in Hyper-V. One area I've personally encountered issues with is live migration. Sometimes during live migrations, the process gets stuck in a certain state. This can happen with replication as well. It's not necessarily a major problem, but at times, the error messages aren't very informative. They don't clearly explain why the migration failed."
"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."
"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."
"We would like to have a cloning function added to this product."
"ometimes a server or machine shuts down and doesn't automatically restart."
"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."
Citrix Hypervisor is ranked 8th in Server Virtualization Software with 45 reviews while Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 134 reviews. Citrix Hypervisor is rated 8.2, while Hyper-V is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Citrix Hypervisor writes "Good features, fair pricing, and excellent reliability". 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, VMware Workstation, Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI). 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.