No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Hyper-V vs RHEV comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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
37
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Server Virtualization Software category, the mindshare of Hyper-V is 17.4%, up from 15.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RHEV is 2.6%, down from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Server Virtualization Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Hyper-V17.4%
RHEV2.6%
Other80.0%
Server Virtualization Software
 

Featured Reviews

Marcelo Siqueira - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Mike Neuliep - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This solution is much easier to manage than a bare metal machine. It is so easy to manage something through the virtual machine."
"It is definitely the toughest competitor for VMware. It easily increases memory for our virtual machines."
"Hyper-V has improved our organization by enabling consolidation, high availability, disaster recovery, backups, and more."
"Live migration, SMB3."
"I find Hyper V useful in managing virtual machines in environments with smaller workloads."
"The product is a great option for enterprise-level organizations."
"The product is not difficult to set up."
"It runs our most critical workloads and supports all our branch offices."
"Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization can help to optimize their space utilization and optimize their costs."
"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."
"The solution is stable, there are no bugs or glitches, it doesn't crash or freeze, and it's reliable with good performance."
"It is very stable."
"I advise keeping an open mind. It's an excellent solution."
"Technical support for RHEV is very fast and good."
"It's a scalable solution."
"The solution is overall very good with all the facilities. It is user friendly, easy to configure, has documentation, and support is available."
 

Cons

"The solution is heavily reliant on Microsoft's active directory for authentication, for coordination between nodes. Therefore, it inherits all the issues that are within the active directory."
"However, we have had some problems with more complicated issues taking a long time to be fixed."
"We're missing quite a lot of features on Hyper-V and I'd like to see more flexibility in terms of moving server automation."
"Cannot copy paste within the app. Some bugs were not fixable and I had to reinstall core OS."
"We'd like a template feature to help deploy VMs quickly."
"The networking portion of Hyper-V needs improvement."
"The product can be a bit difficult to use. I find, for example, Citrix to be much less difficult."
"If you have a lot of Hyper-V servers then you will need an additional product, which is the System Center Virtual Machine Manager, so that you can control the host environments of all of your virtual machines."
"Load balancing not very efficient and fails to utilize and distribute network resources."
"We have found the technical support for this solution to be very slow in responding to our requests for assistance."
"We should improve how we manage storage domains and make more comprehensive control available through the command line."
"I heard that there are big differences between Red Hat eight and seven, but it's still quite difficult for me to judge it. I found it a bit more difficult to manage than version seven, which was much easier. In term of features, though, it is still not yet clear which is better. I have no clear idea of which features need to be changed at the moment."
"Its scalability can be improved. It is not easy to scale, and we hope that Red Hat can provide a more scalable system."
"RHEV can improve by keeping pace with new features and new enhancements. They should not be halted or delayed innovation because over the past quarter the enhancements have not been as fast as they have been previously."
"My teammates and I often complain that VMware is well-documented and has a large community since it is the de facto standard. I would love to see better documentation and ease of use."
"I would love to see better documentation and ease of use."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's cheap, but not the best."
"The pricing is competitive, and a bit less than other options on the market."
"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 tool's pricing is cheap."
"The pricing is not an issue for us because we have a licensing agreement with Microsoft. So we are given an 80% discount."
"Cost-wise, what one gets is directly proportional to the price paid. If the need for capacity doubles, then the price also doubles."
"Hyper-V is free when you buy Windows Server. You only have to pay for engaging in the management aspect in System Center."
"I do not have experience with the pricing or the licensing of the product."
"We buy a license for commercial use, and we also use the free editions."
"RHEV offers pricing based on a per-physical-machine licensing model."
"The solution does not require licencing but a subscription is necessary, which is very affordable."
"Its price depends on the use cases."
"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 have to pay extra for vulnerability and fault tolerance."
"I believe we pay on a yearly basis."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Virtualization Software solutions are best for your needs.
920,043 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VL
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…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
University
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business70
Midsize Enterprise37
Large Enterprise47
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise12
 

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 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...
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?
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...
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...
 

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 2026.
920,043 professionals have used our research since 2012.