Hyper-V vs RHEV comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Microsoft and Red Hat are both solutions in the Server Virtualization Software category. Microsoft is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.0, while Red Hat is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.0. Microsoft holds a 18.6% mindshare in SVS, compared to Red Hat’s 2.4% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 80% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

Hyper-V

Read 146 Hyper-V reviews

25,105 Views
22,092 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

RHEV

Read 37 RHEV reviews

4,184 Views
4,142 Comparison Views

80% willing to recommend

Hyper-V

RHEV

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

RHEV and Hyper-V are competing in virtualization platforms for enterprise needs, with Hyper-V often gaining preference for its feature richness and user satisfaction despite RHEV's competitive support and pricing, indicating Hyper-V's broader capabilities may justify its cost for many organizations.

Features: RHEV provides stability, open-source flexibility, and is known for low costs and straightforward migration capabilities. It supports up to 160 cores and 2 TB of RAM and is particularly efficient in Linux environments. Hyper-V offers dynamic memory allocation, seamless integration with Windows environments, and strong security protocols. It also provides advanced features like live migration and Hyper-V Replica, which enhance dynamic scalability and disaster recovery.

Room for Improvement: RHEV could benefit from improving its feature set to match competitors like VMware, offering richer third-party support, and enhancing scalability features. It might also consider enhancing its compatibility with non-Linux environments. Hyper-V could enhance its automation features, improve the ease of navigating its UI for non-Windows users, and expand its feature set for better competition against VMware's broader capabilities.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: RHEV provides a traditional Linux-oriented deployment that integrates well with existing Linux infrastructures. Users find the setup process straightforward, which benefits Linux-centric organizations. Hyper-V's deployment is more streamlined within Windows environments thanks to tight ecosystem integration, offering Microsoft users a smoother setup process and comfortable management through existing Microsoft services.

Pricing and ROI: RHEV presents an attractive pricing model with lower initial costs and good ROI especially in Linux environments. Its open-source nature makes it a cost-effective choice with competitive pricing against other virtualization options. Hyper-V might require a higher initial investment but offers considerable ROI through its advanced feature set and integration within Windows systems, suggesting that its cost is justified by its comprehensive benefits and simplified management for Windows environments.

To learn more, read our detailed Hyper-V vs. RHEV Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Hyper-V vs. RHEV

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 914,805 peers since 2012

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

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

146

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

RHEV

Ranking in Server Virtualization Software

12th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Server Virtualization Software category, the mindshare of Hyper-V is 18.6%, up from 14.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RHEV is 2.4%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Server Virtualization Software Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Hyper-V	18.6%
RHEV	2.4%
Other	79.0%

Server Virtualization Software

Featured Reviews

Marcelo Siqueira

Especialista de Infraestrutura at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

Virtualization has improved proactive maintenance and observability for complex clustered workloads

Hyper-V could be improved in terms of performance of live migrations. I notice that in VMware, vMotion, which is the same concept as live migration, is faster than in Hyper-V. It is not that it does not work, but in terms of performance, VMware ends up being better for these virtual machine moves.I do not think there is anything else I would like to add regarding necessary improvements related to the interface, stability, or support. The interface is great and very intuitive. Support is also very quick and functional from Microsoft when a problem occurs. Once the environment is very well configured, there should not be problems in Hyper-V. The main area I would improve is mostly the performance of virtual machine migrations. If this migration performance were improved, I believe Hyper-V would reach a perfect score.

Read full review

Mike Neuliep

Linux Systems Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

Has supported virtualization projects in side jobs but has required workarounds due to lack of maintenance

In my opinion, the best features of RHEV are that it is a real hypervisor and it is free, so it performs better than VMware. I have used the live migration feature in the past with RHEV. There is a free clone of it that is based on the open source. Live migration is a nifty feature if your app is not highly available and you need to do maintenance on a machine. You can migrate the VM off of it, do your maintenance, and move it back when you are done. RHEV has a high availability architecture with a built-in monitoring feature where you could see machines other than the one you are operating on. I tend to implement high availability not so much in RHEV, but by using standard application high availability strategies. Red Hat has another product specifically for high availability.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is easy to configure."

"By shifting almost my all physical servers into one Box "Host Machine", I am relaxed now."

"Hyper-V provided freedom to spin up development and test environments, and as projects were created, an environment could be created and applied."

"The setup was straightforward and easy for our company. The deployment was fast."

"It is good for small installations."

"The price of this solution makes it a worthwhile purchase for our organization and we have all of the features we need within a cost-effective solution."

"I value the simplicity of configuration because it has worked as expected for my client."

"Since we implemented the H-V solution we have reported outstanding uptimes."

More Hyper-V pros

"Customers are moving to open source and Red Hat is the leader in this particular space, and I think customers feel more confident running Red Hat Virtualization than VMware."

"One of the most valuable features of this solution is the popularity of the OS."

"If you have a heterogenous data centre that is specially focused on Linux platforms, this is safe money, and good if you are looking for automation."

"For any application that requires 100% uptime, 100% of data accessibility, I use these servers."

"We are very satisfied with it."

"The biggest aspect for me is the disk usage, the virtual manager, and the deployment of machines."

"It's a very good platform to build your virtual machines on and highly integrated with Red Hat itself and its satellites."

"Performance and security are key advantages of RHEV."

More RHEV pros

Cons

"The solution could be more stable as it is vulnerable to viruses, ransomware, and malware."

"I think there is room for improvement in terms of the cloud solutions."

"Hyper-V needs to improve its support."

"Hyper-V is both stable and scalable; however, I also use VMware which I find to be more scalable and stable overall."

"In an upcoming release, they can improve by having better cloud integration. We are all moving towards the clouds and the integration is only through the Azure Stack, there should be tools built in to move the VMs natively to the cloud and infrastructure. Additionally, they could provide some form of multi-cloud integration."

"Technical Support: Average. I say that as my experience with MSFT Support in general has proven to be hit-or-miss with the first-level support."

"Unfortunately, due to cost, we have begun to look at other products in the market."

"Hyper-V could be improved by implementing the same set of features that other tools provide."

More Hyper-V cons

"Its scalability can be improved. It is not easy to scale, and we hope that Red Hat can provide a more scalable system."

"With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected."

"Specifically, enhancements in managing virtual machine migrations, cloning, and the creation of different VMs could further optimize its functionality."

"In comparison to VMware, this solution isn't as stable. We're testing it right now, and we're not trusting the stability of the product."

"We hope that Red Hat can produce a paradigm edition. We are looking for paradigm computing and paradigm storage. Its scalability can be improved. It is not easy to scale, and we hope that Red Hat can provide a more scalable system. They should also provide local service and support. Our customers are looking for a good software vendor to provide professional services."

"Load balancing not very efficient and fails to utilize and distribute network resources."

"Red Hat by itself is not scalable. But you can have third party add-ons like Ceph to make it massively scalable."

"I found it a bit more difficult to manage than version seven, which was much easier."

More RHEV cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Hyper-V is part of Windows Server, so there are no extra costs for the product."

"It's cheap, but not the best."

"Licensing cost depends on the edition you choose. There are two main options: Standard and Datacenter. With a Datacenter license, you can only create two virtual machines that are covered by the license itself. You can create more VMs, but they won't be licensed and could result in charges during an audit."

"Hyper-V is cost-effective and is a one-time purchase. Microsoft has multiple licensing options available, such as a subscription model and an outside purchase model that customers can choose as per their requirements."

"The product is a bit expensive, but it is worth the money."

"Cost-wise, what one gets is directly proportional to the price paid. If the need for capacity doubles, then the price also doubles."

"Once we bought the datacenter version of the server, we did away with worrying about the cost of licensing our VMs separately"

"I think it is expensive. I think if they want it to be more competitive, they should lower the price."

More Hyper-V pricing and cost advice

"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."

"I would say the price is acceptable."

"This is an open-source solution."

"I believe we pay on a yearly basis."

"Its price depends on the use cases."

"The solution does not require licencing but a subscription is necessary, which is very affordable."

"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."

"The price of RHEV is high. It is an open-source solution, the price should be less. The price should not be on par with a solution, such as VMware. It's not more or equal to VMware, it's less, but the difference should be more substantial."

More RHEV pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Virtualization Software solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

914,805 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Comparison Review

Thang Le Toan (Victory Lee)

CIO at Robusta Technology & Training

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…

Read full review

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

University

Computer Software Company

Comms Service Provider

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	70
Midsize Enterprise	37
Large Enterprise	47

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	21
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	12

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Hyper-V?

My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing for Hyper-V is that Microsoft licensing is not cheap. However, it is very worthwhile to have this environment fully licensed once it is very w...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with RHEV?

RHEV is not improving because it has been discontinued. It has been discontinued for years. I would love to get back into RHEV, but the job market is difficult and no one is hiring. RHEV is designe...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for RHEV?

I have done some consulting where I used RHEV, taking on side jobs to run virtual machines in the financial industry for a startup. The last time I used RHEV was in my home lab, but that has been d...

See all answers

Comparisons

VMware vSphere vs Hyper-V

Compared 46% of the time

KVM vs Hyper-V

Compared 7% of the time

VMware Workstation vs Hyper-V

Compared 7% of the time

Proxmox VE vs Hyper-V

Compared 5% of the time

XCP-ng virtualization platform vs Hyper-V

Compared 2% of the time

More Hyper-V Competitors

VMware vSphere vs RHEV

Compared 16% of the time

Proxmox VE vs RHEV

Compared 13% of the time

Oracle VM vs RHEV

Compared 10% of the time

KVM vs RHEV

Compared 7% of the time

DxEnterprise vs RHEV

Compared 6% of the time

More RHEV Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Hyper-V

September 2026

Download Hyper-V product report

Buyer's Guide

RHEV

September 2026

Download RHEV product report

Also Known As

No data available

Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization

Overview

Hyper-V delivers scalability, cost-effectiveness, and seamless Windows integration with dynamic memory, live migration, and replication capabilities. Its interface and automation tools optimize resource management, enhancing operational efficiency in virtualized settings.

Hyper-V stands out for its advanced networking features, offering proactive VM replication and high availability. Simplified setup alongside built-in Powershell scripting boosts automation capabilities, while Virtual SAN Manager aids in reducing hardware investments. However, improvements are needed in cloud platform integration and operational interface to enhance user experience. Licensing costs are significant, and support for diverse OS remains limited. Networking and live migration require fine-tuning to improve performance. Despite challenges in deployment and compatibility, Hyper-V remains a preferred choice for hosting vital production servers and providing robust virtualization solutions across diverse environments.

What key features does Hyper-V offer?

Scalability: Supports flexible resource allocation for growing environments.
Seamless Windows Integration: Easily integrates with Windows-based systems.
Dynamic Memory: Efficiently manages memory allocation in real time.
Live Migration: Allows live transfer of VM workloads with minimal impact.
Hyper-V Replica: Provides robust VM replication for high availability.

What are the anticipated benefits of using Hyper-V?

Cost-Efficiency: Reduces operational costs through effective virtualization.
Resource Optimization: Efficiently utilizes existing hardware and software.
High Availability: Ensures ongoing service delivery and data protection.
Operational Efficiency: Enhances productivity with robust automation tools.

Organizations in education, finance, and IT sectors deploy Hyper-V for virtualization, using it to consolidate servers and manage infrastructures efficiently. Its integration with platforms like Microsoft Azure facilitates cloud solutions, supporting applications like SQL Server, Exchange, and Linux in diverse operational settings.

Microsoft

RHEV offers a cost-effective virtualization platform with support for up to 160 cores and 2 TB of RAM per host, emphasizing open-source accessibility and integration with applications like OpenStack.

RHEV stands out with features such as high performance, stability, ease of migration, and robust security. Its integration capabilities with diverse applications and the self-service Power user portal enhance its appeal for IT environments. While the platform's affordability compared to VMware is noted, areas for improvement include the GUI, user-friendliness, network virtualization, and the need for enhanced pricing and support in regions lacking system integrators. RHEV's ability to facilitate seamless migration from legacy systems to virtual environments is widely adopted in sectors such as government, banking, and IT services.

What are the key features of RHEV?

Open-Source Accessibility: Offers flexibility and customization options.
High Performance: Supports up to 160 cores and 2 TB of RAM per host.
Seamless Integration: Integrates well with applications like OpenStack.
Live VM Migration: Enables continuous operations without downtime.
Power User Portal: Provides self-service capabilities for users.

What benefits and ROI can users expect?

Cost Optimization: Provides a cost-effective alternative to VMware.
Scalable Computing: Allows flexible resource allocation and scaling.
Migration Efficiency: Facilitates moving from legacy systems smoothly.
Robust Security: Enhances data protection and privacy management.

RHEV is widely used in high-computing tasks like AI and big data analytics within data centers, supporting cloud solutions, AI, and ERP systems. It's implemented in privacy clouds for industries such as government, banking, and IT services to migrate workloads from physical to virtual environments and optimize operational costs.

Red Hat

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.

Buyer's Guide

Hyper-V vs. RHEV

September 2026

Free Report: Hyper-V vs. RHEV

Find out what your peers are saying about Hyper-V vs. RHEV and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

914,805 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Hyper-V vs. RHEV 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.