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.
"I like that it's easy to use."
"My understanding is it's easy to set up."
"It utilizes the hardware so there are multiple applications running on one hypervisor."
"We've probably seen a 50 percent speed increase on our SQL server. Hyper-V has also significantly reduced our downtimes with faster boot-up and reboot. If we have to reboot a server, there is maybe two or three minutes of downtime. When we were on a bare-metal server, it could be five to ten minutes due to the total boot time."
"The interface is quite good."
"The performance is very good."
"It is actually very low on resources. It doesn't use many resources. It is also very easy to tailor. You can change things like the amount of memory and storage on the fly. It is very stable and reliable. I like its replication feature, which is very good. It is also very easy to move the virtual machines across push servers without any difficulty. Its performance is also very good. Now with this pandemic, a lot of workers are working from home. A lot of workers have been using laptops as their desktop computers, and they would remote into a virtual PC. There is no difficulty, and they can't tell the difference between this and the real one. It is much easier to manage."
"It is an affordable platform."
"This product stands out for its user-friendly interface, intuitive design, and responsive UI. It offers AVH features comparable to Nutanix but at a more cost-effective price point."
"The solution scales very well."
"Nutanix AHV is very scalable. It can go to unlimited nodes."
"Nutanix's customer support is good, one of its biggest selling points."
"The most valuable feature of Nutanix AHV is the prism, it is a beneficial central management console."
"With AHV, you can run micro-segmentation, which is, on the network security level, to have network virtualization across clouds."
"The feature that has had the most impact is data locality. That is a feature that makes Nutanix different from other hypervisors. It helps us to get application performance that is probably double what we got with the legacy, three-tier architecture."
"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."
"We have our cluster connected to a Dell EMC VNX (SAN). The Hyper-V nodes are on Cisco UCS blades, and everything is interconnected via fiber. I attempted to use a virtual Fibre Channel connection to present a SAN volume to a VM but was not able to make that work."
"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."
"I think the setup for the Virtual Network Manager could be improved."
"Disaster recovery capabilities are the primary choice for improvement."
"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."
"Some of the interfaces need improvements, like the virtual switch or virtual VLAN interfaces."
"Traditional architecture, such as converged infrastructure, should be done away with"
"It should be deployed with OS so there is no need to install OS separately, only select the OS and get it ready."
"Honestly, there's a lot to work on the product, especially for someone like me who has worked on VMware. VMware offers a significant level of customization when configuring virtual machines, and that level of detail is not as pronounced on Nutanix AHV Virtualization."
"There is room for improvement in the USB mapping."
"I would like to see better decompression or degrouping of the VMs so that we can use a single number of SQLs with two servers. We don't need a huge number of DXSPs."
"The price of Nutanix AHV Virtualization could improve."
"The software based controller has high consumption. This could be improved."
"They need to work on the deployment of virtual machines. They need to streamline the process of templates and deploying virtual machines."
"My storage use is doubled; if I am creating a one TB virtual machine then my storage policy will take two TB from my cluster."
"Nutanix’s support team is not very efficient compared to others."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 134 reviews while Nutanix AHV Virtualization is ranked 6th in Server Virtualization Software with 44 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, Oracle VM VirtualBox and Citrix Hypervisor, whereas Nutanix AHV Virtualization is most compared with Proxmox VE, VMware vSphere, KVM, Citrix Hypervisor and Oracle VM. 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.
