Hyper-V vs RHEV comparison

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 #13 with an average rating of 8.2. Microsoft holds a 19.8% 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 145 Hyper-V reviews

23,519 Views
20,462 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

RHEV

Read 37 RHEV reviews

3,987 Views
3,947 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: June 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Hyper-V vs. RHEV

June 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 902,495 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

6.8

Number of Reviews

145

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

RHEV

Ranking in Server Virtualization Software

13th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Server Virtualization Software category, the mindshare of Hyper-V is 19.8%, up from 14.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RHEV is 2.4%, down from 3.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Server Virtualization Software Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Hyper-V	19.8%
RHEV	2.4%
Other	77.8%

Server Virtualization Software

Featured Reviews

Tomas Basus

IT Professional at NIPOS

Virtualization has reduced licensing costs and improved integration but still needs better performance insight

Integrations bring the biggest benefit to us. We use half of our virtual machines that are Microsoft, so it works better hosted in Hyper-V compared to VMware. Clustering and failover capabilities in the product help with our availability. It helped because we switched to Hyper-V because it was lower cost than paying for high availability in VMware. We need Microsoft licenses for virtual machines, so it costs less than buying two solutions for that. We have data center editions, so it did not cost us additional money compared to paying for high availability from VMware. I think it helped a little, but not so different compared to VMware regarding security and bandwidth optimization.

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

"It is beneficial for those who need to set up virtual machines without licensing requirements."

"The hypervisor based server visualization product, launched from Microsoft along with Microsoft Server 2008 R2, greatly helps in managing high availability, load balancing, resource sharing, and fail over clustering."

"Migration is easy."

"One of the most valuable features of Hyper-V is ease to use."

"Live migration, SMB3."

"Windows Server Hyper-V is one of the best visualization servers in the market today."

"Of course I now fall firmly with the side of VMware and some will argue that my own view is blurred but I can tell you that my current opinions are based on fact and experience…not desperate attempts to discredit otherwise far far superior technology…but then again…Microsoft have made a habit of this so it doesn’t surprise me."

"The technical support for Hyper-V is excellent, and I rate it as nine out of ten."

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."

"Technically, the main reason why I'm using Red Hat is because of its stability."

"The solution has a good licensing module."

"We are very satisfied with it."

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

"Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization can help to optimize their space utilization and optimize their costs."

"It is easy to deal with when comes to application migration and its compatibility with the multiple component applications."

"There aren't any bugs on the solution."

More RHEV pros

Cons

"We have our scientific network, and it's run off the university sever, and we need two servers to optimize our scientific work, such as the mathematics work. Then you have to work with Python and Java, and Microsoft isn't the best option for this kind of work."

"If a person has never implemented the solution before, they might find the process difficult."

"Failure capabilities are insufficient for disaster recovery. Better disaster recovery is required."

"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."

"The Hyper-V management console could be improved to make it easier. It should be a little bit more granular. Various virtual switches could also be improved to make virtual desk management slightly better. The replication could be improved slightly. The checkpoints or snapshots could be improved to make it a bit more transparent to the user."

"Sometimes there's a bit of slowness in the VMs. The performance could be a bit better."

"It would be nice if it was turned into its own product because that's the problem with it. It doesn't have a single place where you can manage things. You have to go into all different screens to be able to configure it. And then you have no idea what the performance is. It's really just a feature added to Windows, and Microsoft does not really have anything that pulls it all together well. Compared to VMware, it does not have everything collaborate on one screen."

"ometimes a server or machine shuts down and doesn't automatically restart."

More Hyper-V cons

"This solution could be more secure."

"The solution could improve its pricing."

"The GUI interface needs improvement. Not 90%, but 50% or 60% of the work is done from the command line and so on, so the GUI needs work because people are looking for an easier way to manage the environment."

"You need to buy support from red hat and you need to renew support every year in order to keep getting support from red hat."

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

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

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

"The solution could use network virtualization."

More RHEV cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Hyper-V is included in the Microsoft Azure license for no extra cost. However, they charge for technical support calls on an hourly basis."

"Because we're an NGO or a charity, we get discount rates from Microsoft. The costs are not astronomical for us. To give you an example, Office 2019 would only cost 30 or 45 for us. We tend to use the on-premises version rather than the cloud version. The reason is that the subscription service works out more expensive after a few years than the on-premise version. We're not worried about having the bleeding edge stuff. We just want it to be functional."

"The solution is not expensive, and the subscription is annual."

"Microsoft Hyper-V is not expensive and is easy to set up."

"This is a fairly expensive product because it balances the needs of security."

"It comes with all the features and goodies inside the box, so you do not have to purchase anything else."

"The product comes with Windows Server."

"I think I'm okay with the cost. There are no monthly or yearly costs or additional costs."

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 believe we pay on a yearly basis."

"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."

"Its price depends on the use cases."

"We buy a license for commercial use, and we also use the free editions."

"We have to pay extra for vulnerability and fault tolerance."

"We are using the free version of Red Hat."

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

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

902,495 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%

Computer Software Company

University

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

12%

Computer Software Company

11%

Comms Service Provider

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	70
Midsize Enterprise	37
Large Enterprise	46

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?

I think regarding price and license for Hyper-V, it is affordable.

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 49% of the time

VMware Workstation vs Hyper-V

Compared 7% of the time

KVM vs Hyper-V

Compared 6% of the time

Proxmox VE vs Hyper-V

Compared 5% of the time

oVirt vs Hyper-V

Compared 2% of the time

More Hyper-V Competitors

VMware vSphere vs RHEV

Compared 17% of the time

Proxmox VE vs RHEV

Compared 15% of the time

Oracle VM vs RHEV

Compared 11% of the time

KVM vs RHEV

Compared 8% of the time

Nutanix AHV Virtualization vs RHEV

Compared 6% of the time

More RHEV Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Hyper-V

June 2026

Download Hyper-V product report

Buyer's Guide

RHEV

June 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

June 2026

Free Report: Hyper-V vs. RHEV

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

902,495 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.