We performed a comparison between Hyper-V and KVM 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 is the clear winner in this comparison it is easy to install, robust and high performing. Hyper-V, as a Microsoft product, also offers stable and ongoing customer support.
"This is the best solution for customers with budget constraints."
"It makes it easier to deploy service. All service tends to migrate onto the server house without having problems now. It is hardware independent."
"I like that it's easy to use."
"Hyper-V provided freedom to spin up development and test environments. As projects were created, an environment could be created and applied."
"I like that Hyper-V is like a virtual environment. I like to use VMware because of the resource requirements. In Sri Lanka, most of the customers use the Hyper-V GUI. When installing the interface with the Windows version, we also install the Hyper-V feature on the server. This is because they require more features and memory. There are so many features that they have embedded in Hyper-V that are useful."
"Using cluster with Hyper-V had a major impact on our protection environment. So all applications were virtualized using Hyper-V."
"We chose this solution because of the pricing and the simplicity of the product."
"The Failover Clustering feature allows us to be able to make our most critical workload highly available."
"The key aspect is that the KVM directly interacts with the Kronos. There's no clear indication of indirect communication with Kronos. It is not linked to Kronos, and interaction is straightforward without any intermediaries."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"The tool's most valuable feature is backup. The product makes it easy to manage virtual machines. Other tools require third-party applications like VMware and vSphere. However, KVM doesn't require these applications."
"I like that this is an open-source solution. It is very powerful, and it's easy."
"Very cost-effective."
"Good screen and keyboard sharing feature."
"The most valuable feature of KVM is its stability."
"Scaling the solution is easy. You just have to add more hardware."
"I would love to see other options for connecting VMs to large data storage."
"Some of the interfaces need improvements, like the virtual switch or virtual VLAN interfaces."
"Disaster recovery capabilities are the primary choice for improvement."
"It needs additional administration and monitoring capabilities."
"Sometimes it is a mess, and it is getting hanged. It should be something that could be easily fixed. It made us have to deal with fixing the bugs."
"The interface could be more user friendly. In addition, the documentation and security could use improvement."
"When one server or one virtual machine fails, or one is turned off, the virtualization stops, and we have to initiate again with human intervention."
"Hyper-V needs to improve its support."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved and made more user-friendly."
"Support for VF is needed, where you can, for example, export from VMware to KVM."
"I would like to see more focus on microservices and integration with Kubernetes or OpenShift."
"I believe KVM offers a unified answer, while ProxMark addresses orchestration. KVM lacks orchestration. If the aim is to centrally oversee multiple KVMs – let's say to freeze them – a centralized management solution is absent."
"I have encountered difficulties in getting the tool's documentation."
"Its resource usage can be improved."
"The product must provide better performance monitoring features."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 134 reviews while KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 39 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 8.0, while KVM is rated 8.0. 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 KVM writes "Delivers good performance because of kernel-based virtualization". Hyper-V is most compared with VMware vSphere, VMware Workstation, Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas KVM is most compared with Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox, VMware vSphere, VMware Workstation and Oracle VM. See our Hyper-V vs. KVM 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.