We performed a comparison between Hyper-V and Proxmox VE based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Hyper-V and Proxmox VE seem to have a more or less rating among users regarding ease of deployment, pricing, and service and support. In terms of features, users of Hyper-V weren’t satisfied with the recovery capabilities and the instability if the stack became bloated. On the other hand, users of Proxmox VE didn’t like the need to update manually but felt that the solution was young. Therefore, the bugs they experienced will hopefully have a solution with a future update.
"We appreciate how easy this solution is to implement on standalone severs."
"It's a very manageable product."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the storage virtualization."
"The solution has good scalability."
"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 is stable."
"The most valuable feature of Hyper-V is that it's very intuitive."
"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."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"I like that it's secure, and I find its Software RAID very useful. It's way better than the Hardware RAID I was used to. I'm really impressed by their Software RAID feature."
"In addition to the virtualization, the firewall and the routing functions that it provides are valuable."
"The most valuable features of Proxmox VE are the ease of containerization. Overall the solution is generic, feature-rich, and has compatibility."
"The most valuable feature of Proxmox VE is its storage."
"There are many features included with Proxmox."
"The most valuable feature of Proxmox VE is the speed. Additionally, I can modify the solution if needed because it is open-source and the integration of any kind of API and monitoring is hassle-free."
"It has a good performance and you can cluster it."
"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."
"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."
"Hyper-V requires improvement with manageability."
"Sometimes there's a bit of slowness in the VMs."
"It's not completely stable because your stack becomes bloated."
"It would be better if it demanded less memory. Once you have allocated those memory spaces for the installed server, fewer resources are left to allocate for the Hyper-V virtual environment. That's the drawback with that. For example, once you install Windows 10, and let's say Windows 2019, Windows 2019 will take at least 10 GB of memory. If a customer has only 16 GB of RAM on the system, they think of installing Hyper-V. Because when you have windows 2019 or something else, they give two free Hyper-V virtual licenses. But we can't because there's not enough memory. We can, however, install this as a VMS. But this UI isn't that user-friendly for most customers. They like to have a user interface with VMI, and it's not easy when you install VMI. It would also be better if they can improve their core Hyper-V version to be a bit more familiar and user-friendly with its interface. I think it would be much easier. We had a few issues with the VM Hyper-V virtual network. Once you have such issues, it's very difficult to find out where they came from. They had such issues, and we had to resolve the system again. But other than that, if it's useful and keeps working nicely, it will work very nicely even if something happens. But it's very hectic and challenging to find out where it's happening. In the next release, it would be better to control this data store part in a manageable way. This is because once we install and create a Hyper-V machine, it goes everywhere. It would be better if it had a single location and a single folder with a heartbeat and virtual machine information. You can just go forward, and the data store and everything are going into one place like the C drive. But something always goes fast, or everything gets lost if the customer doesn't manually change the direction of where the virtual hard drive routes, the more serious the problem. It would be better if they could merge all that together. This includes the virtual machine and the virtual hard drive in the same folder when creating the virtual machine. I think that it would be much easier to manage and in case something happens. Technical support also could be better."
"I'd like to see better predictive diagnostics, so I know what's going on with the machines."
"The solution could improve by having virtual restore."
"It is a good solution, but it is very complicated in some ways. It is not easy. You must have experience in the console mode to do some configurations. A lot of documentation and YouTube videos are available that you can use to learn about it."
"The documentation in Proxmox VE could improve."
"Its user interface can be improved. In the version that I am using, not all functions can be performed by using the UI. There can be some improvement on that. I'm assuming that it has already been improved in the latest version."
"One issue with Proxmox is that some processes are not automatic. For some processes, you have to do it manually by command line."
"A feature which should be added is the ability to encrypt the main installation."
"We are using servers individually, and we are looking for a reliable application that allows us to hop between servers with high availability."
"It's one of those things for me to move things on to the cloud. It's not so easy. I am always on the laptop and have to monitor that because if you want to make strides; you need to stay online."
"The solution can be improved by making it more secure and scalable."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 46 reviews while Proxmox VE is ranked 2nd in Server Virtualization Software with 18 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 7.6, while Proxmox VE 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 Proxmox VE writes "Feature rich, good compatibility, and impressive fuctionality". Hyper-V is most compared with VMware vSphere, VMware Workstation, Oracle VM VirtualBox, KVM and Citrix Hypervisor, whereas Proxmox VE is most compared with KVM, Oracle VM VirtualBox, VMware vSphere, Nutanix AHV Virtualization and Citrix Hypervisor. See our Hyper-V 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.
