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.
"The compatibility of the solution is its most valuable feature. It's compatible on almost every cloud these days."
"The solution's security is its most valuable aspect."
"What I like the most is the support of the GPU Graphics and the VM Live migration."
"The support for this solution is phenomenal."
"This solution allows the end users to clone, start, stop, or remotely control their VMs."
"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."
"The solution is easy to deploy. It's very easy to understand problems and read logs."
"The solution is extremely user friendly."
"It's a stable product."
"I like the functionality."
"The solution is stable."
"The simplicity and intuitiveness of the platform. It was a very simple adaptation, if you have any experience in virtualization."
"It's good for what it does. If you have a small or medium-scale acclimatization, it's an excellent solution."
"Hyper-V is much easier to deploy because Hyper-V is already installed inside Windows Server OS. You only need to turn on Hyper-V as a service, and then you can use it. The most convenient thing about Hyper-V is the operating system."
"II prefer customers to use Hyper-V because Hyper-V is mostly integrated with Microsoft solutions."
"The flexibility and API are the most valuable features. It helps us be able to integrate with other systems and then push data easily."
"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."
"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."
"The licensing costs are too high on the solution. They should work to make the costs more reasonable."
"I am not very sure about how flexible Citrix Hypervisor is with different types of infrastructures. I only know it is flexible with Nutanix, but I am not sure if it is also flexible with others. They can make its integration with other platforms or OEMs easy. They should also make it easy for users to manage their infrastructure. Citrix should make compatibility information related to a hypervisor easily available in a datasheet. Citrix isn't really recognized in this part of the world, and they need to expand their solution and make it more available. There are a lot of customers and companies that are looking for a solution like Citrix, and it should be available in this part of the world. They need to educate people more. Technically, it is good and flexible and has good ability, but it is not as much known as VMware or Microsoft. Their support should also be improved. Currently, if you don't have an updated version, they will not give you the attention."
"The built-in networking features are a little limited."
"The solution is too expensive and people are kind of moving away from Citrix. It's starting to become a problem. It is a primary reason that while we are rebuilding we're going to seek out open-source solutions."
"The self-service user portal needs to be more granular and be more customizable."
"The manageability of the solution needs improvement. It's an extremely bad product to handle."
"The weakness of Hyper-V is in its interaction with iSCSI protocols."
"The area revolving around operations in the product has certain shortcomings where improvements are required."
"Improvements could be made to the configuration of the solution."
"They can hot add NICs to the VMs. However, there is still not the ability to hot add virtual processors to running VMs."
"It needs additional administration and monitoring capabilities."
"It needs to improve compatibility with third party software."
"It should be deployed with OS so there is no need to install OS separately, only select the OS and get it ready."
"In terms of performance, when compared to VMware, it is much slower."
Citrix Hypervisor is ranked 8th in Server Virtualization Software with 46 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 "Allows us to allocate CPU, memory, storage, and network resources across VMs and minimizes downtime in case of hardware failure or maintenance". 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, KVM 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.
