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 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
ProductMindshare (%)
Hyper-V18.6%
RHEV2.4%
Other79.0%
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

"Hyper-V improved the infrastructure drastically, not only from a performance perspective but from a control and administration view as well, directly benefiting the products and services offered on the platform and allowing customers to increase or decrease resources on their workloads at any given time while reducing their costs."
"I find the ease of use the most valuable asset of the solution."
"We can perform maintenance on equipment during the day because we can live migrate all of the machines from server A to server B, and then work on server A."
"The solution's ease of use is the most important feature, as it is very easy to use and implement, with very good fail-over features that allow servers to run in a fail-over cluster so that whenever one server fails, you can migrate the workloads to the second one to avoid service downtime or minimize it at the very least."
"We've probably seen a 50 percent speed increase on our SQL server. Hyper-V has also significantly reduced our downtimes with faster boot-up and reboot. If we have to reboot a server, there is maybe two or three minutes of downtime. When we were on a bare-metal server, it could be five to ten minutes due to the total boot time."
"I like that Hyper-V comes for free with Windows Server. You don't need to buy the license, and you only have to pay for the management aspect in System Center."
"It is easy to use, and it is stable. It is a good solution."
"I like that it's easy to use."
"It's a very good platform to build your virtual machines on and highly integrated with Red Hat itself and its satellites."
"It is very stable."
"It is a very good solution, it works very well, we haven't had any issues with any technical aspects and it works well."
"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 most valuable feature of Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization is its pricing."
"The biggest aspect for me is the disk usage, the virtual manager, and the deployment of machines."
"When you purchase RHEV, you are essentially buying a subscription license. This license can be integrated with various client types, including these integrations with the subscription."
"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."
 

Cons

"I didn't give it a 10 out of 10 because sometimes remotely managing it isn't as simple as it could be."
"Status and availability became an issue and need."
"If I was going to a demo, and somebody had given me an iPhone and I had to quickly gut it, my first choice would not be Hyper-V. It is not a user-friendly solution."
"Hyper-V systems need a lot of admin effort because security updates and monthly updates require rebooting after the update."
"Microsoft increased the price for this solution when adding the Storage Spaces Direct feature."
"The solution should improve its native integration with other public cloud solutions."
"It should be deployed with OS so there is no need to install OS separately, only select the OS and get it ready."
"We do experience some instability with the platform."
"Specifically, enhancements in managing virtual machine migrations, cloning, and the creation of different VMs could further optimize its functionality."
"They don't know how to sell their great products and don’t really seem to be interested in taking care of their partners who trust and really know their products."
"The Administration of the Oracle database and the SAP ERP needs improvement."
"The documentation is not as good as it should be. There is a need for making it descriptive and in sequence."
"It would be better to have more patches, especially kernel-level updates, live and online so that we can keep the business up and running during this period."
"I would love to see better documentation and ease of use."
"Scalability depends on the applications. Red Hat by itself is not scalable."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Hyper-V is more cost-effective for the size of our business One of the Hyper-V's biggest advantages over VMware is the cost. We are a small business, so Hyper-V allowed us to virtualize everything we need without breaking the bank."
"The license is free."
"The tool's pricing is cheap."
"In terms of the licensing, if you are using Microsoft Windows 100%, it is OK. But, when you start mixing other environments, it becomes quite tricky."
"The licensing costs depend on the environment you have. If you have an environment of less than 10 or 30 VMs, It's nice to have a Hyper-V, but if you have more than 100 or 200, I would recommend using VCenter, VMware virtualization, especially for an on-premise solution."
"There is a license to use this solution and it is an annual purchase."
"The licensing is good for a data center environment."
"This product costs less than other competitor products on the market."
"This is an open-source solution."
"I believe we pay on a yearly basis."
"Its price depends on the use cases."
"We are using the free version of Red Hat."
"The solution does not require licencing but a subscription is necessary, which is very affordable."
"We have to pay extra for vulnerability and fault tolerance."
"Price-wise, RHEV is okay, in my opinion."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Virtualization Software solutions are best for your needs.
912,565 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
8%
Computer Software Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction 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?
I think regarding price and license for Hyper-V, it is affordable.
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: August 2026.
912,565 professionals have used our research since 2012.