Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Hyper-V vs RHEV comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 6, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Hyper-V
Ranking in Server Virtualization Software
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
144
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
RHEV
Ranking in Server Virtualization Software
13th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Server Virtualization Software category, the mindshare of Hyper-V is 14.8%, up from 14.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RHEV is 3.1%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Server Virtualization Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Hyper-V14.8%
RHEV3.1%
Other82.1%
Server Virtualization Software
 

Featured Reviews

Ananth Narayana Rao - PeerSpot reviewer
Cost-effective and good for small workloads while addressing update-driven challenges is needed
I use Azure Monitor and other monitoring solutions to support clients in Accenture's managed services. We support multiple environments, primarily on cloud platforms like Azure and AWS, and also on-premises environments with operating systems like Windows, Linux, and Solaris, among others…
Sujeet-Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
The solution is scalable and affordable, but it lacks features, and it is not easy to manage
Management of RHEV is not as easy as VMware. Some features do not work. The product does not provide features similar to VMware’s VMotion. After creating the cluster, the VM is moved to another node if we move down. However, the VM does not move the parent node automatically. It has to be moved manually. VMware moves it automatically. RHEV moves it to the parent node only if we restart. Everything can be handled in VMware through the GUI. However, in RHEV, some things can be managed through UI, and others cannot. We have to troubleshoot and use CLI. A few features of the product do not work as well as those in VMware.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the ability to integrate the Hyper-Visor center from one console."
"The organization has realized the benefits on smaller data center space, power, cooling, etc. apart from the benefit that the virtualization layer brings in."
"I think the cluster environment is a good feature of Hyper-V because, if something happens, then it will automatically move to some other mode. This is a great feature of the solution."
"It allowed us to add on servers and fix things in an expedient manner."
"The solution is very powerful, easy to use, user-friendly, and integrates well with Windows. If you are looking for a hundred percent Microsoft environment it would be a good idea to go with Hyper-V. They work wonderfully together."
"There are some products that you can mount over Hyper-V that provide the features that, in today's Hyper-V, are not present."
"The solution is highly scalable."
"The Failover Clustering feature allows us to be able to make our most critical workload highly available."
"The most valuable features of RHEV are all the tools, such as virtualization, management of cloud platforms, and integration of container environments. The solution has good compatibility between virtualization, content management, and cloud management. Having the full set of these tools is the advantage of it."
"We find the ease of use of this solution to be invaluable. It is user-friendly and integrates well with other software."
"Customers are moving to open source and Red Hat is the leader in this particular space. I think customers feel more confident running Red Hat Virtualization than VMware."
"The solution is a great all-round product. The virtualization is especially good."
"I advise keeping an open mind. It's an excellent solution."
"This solution is very stable. Much more so than similar products."
"It is very stable."
"It is a scalable solution."
 

Cons

"Storage via SMB3."
"If I want to create a cluster of around five to 10 physical servers Hyper-V does not get integrated with any kind of virtual sense, such as vSense."
"The initial setup was complex. It was nearly six years ago, but I remember it was complicated."
"The biggest problem with Hyper-V is that the virtual machines are mostly running on top of the Windows Server, so we often need to reboot the machine and virtual machines when updating the host level. That's why we prefer VMware. It's much easier to patch the host. Also, Hyper-V has security vulnerabilities. It's easy to attack and compromise the host."
"Hyper-V systems need a lot of admin effort because security updates and monthly updates require rebooting after the update."
"I think the setup for the Virtual Network Manager could be improved."
"Status and availability became an issue and need."
"The solution is lacking in numerous features and lacks flexibility."
"The biggest improvement would be more third-party direct support for things like backups and provisioning through third-party portals."
"It would be better to have more patches, especially kernel-level updates, live and online so that we can keep the business up and running during this period."
"The solution has a very small lifecycle."
"There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference."
"Specifically, enhancements in managing virtual machine migrations, cloning, and the creation of different VMs could further optimize its functionality."
"This solution could be more secure."
"The availability of technical expertise with the solution may be limited in some areas."
"I would love to see better documentation and ease of use."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product's price is low."
"I wish the licensing was simpler, and allowed for a greater number of VM's with the Microsoft standard licensing, but overall I think it's fair. The pricing is definitely fair."
"The license is free."
"I do not have experience with the pricing or the licensing of the product."
"There is a license to use this solution and it is an annual purchase."
"Hyper-V is expensive."
"There is no cost associated with it if customers are already using Microsoft products."
"There is nothing extra required for Hyper-V apart from the licenses that one purchases to use Microsoft Windows."
"It's a budget product as far as I'm concerned. It's way cheaper than any of its competitors. The only thing cheaper than Red Hat is that the people who take the Red Hat code clone it and then self-support it."
"We have to pay extra for vulnerability and fault tolerance."
"Price-wise, RHEV is okay, in my opinion."
"We are using the free version of Red Hat."
"This product has a variety of licensing options available. However, the level of licensing, and therefore the cost of licensing, is dependent on the number of servers being utilized."
"We buy a license for commercial use, and we also use the free editions."
"The solution does not require licencing but a subscription is necessary, which is very affordable."
"I believe we pay on a yearly basis."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Virtualization Software solutions are best for your needs.
867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VL
Jan 13, 2015
vSphere vs. RHEV vs. Hyper-V vs. XenServer
We have used the following functions: 1. Hypervisor: to ensure that the virtual server provide web and email services to the company, thus providing a stable operation a with single sign-on integration of an AD server and vCenter. 2. Network and Storage: centralized data server…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise37
Large Enterprise45
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

How does KVM compare with Hyper-V?
KVM is better. But let's just look at the software instead of judging. Hyper-V was a free solution from Microsoft to virtualize Server or Client OS as it is a feature on Windows Server since 2008 a...
How does Proxmox VE compare with Hyper-V?
One of the best things about Proxmox VE is that it is open-source and very inexpensive. You get all of the same features as with the more well-known products. Proxmox VE is very easy to deploy - it...
What do you like most about Hyper-V?
The initial setup is not difficult at all. It is very easy.
What do you like most about RHEV?
The initial setup is fairly straightforward and well-documented. The process is very similar to its competitors. The success of your setup depends on how well you plan.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for RHEV?
It's the open source. There's not much cost. It's very minimal comparably. Compared to what I am paying for VMware, it's negligible.
What needs improvement with RHEV?
The RHEV management plane could be improved, particularly the management interface. Something more similar to a Google, Amazon, or Azure interface might attract people to use its management interfa...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Large customer base from all industries, all over the world. Two major Hyper-V customers are Telefonica and EmpireCLS.
Qualcomm and Bonham's Auction House.
Find out what your peers are saying about Hyper-V vs. RHEV and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.