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

"Hyper-V's technical support is good - they're responsive and sort cases based on criticality and category, so they get dealt with quickly and by the correct team."
"I value the simplicity of configuration because it has worked as expected for my client."
"It is an affordable platform."
"I would recommend Hyper-V to others because it has good capacity and requires little maintenance."
"I find the quick provision feature in Hyper-V to be extremely helpful."
"It is very robust, it doesn't consume as many resources as VMware, it is fairly slick, very functional, and doesn't really present great challenges."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the storage virtualization."
"Great Hypervisor with snapshot capability, and fail over clustering integration."
"The solution is stable, there are no bugs or glitches, it doesn't crash or freeze, and it's reliable with good performance."
"The platform is scalable, allowing for the installation of multiple nodes."
"Technically, the main reason why I'm using Red Hat is because of its stability."
"Whenever there's an issue or problem, I contact customer support and they take it seriously."
"It's a very good platform to build your virtual machines on and highly integrated with Red Hat itself and its satellites."
"For the Windows side, we also initiated a digital transformation project, moving a lot of Windows applications to the container side and the open-source software side, which resulted in almost 70% savings of our past expenses."
"What they provide is way beyond the essential requirements of customers."
"Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization can help to optimize their space utilization and optimize their costs."
 

Cons

"The user interface of the tool is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"It needs to improve compatibility with third party software."
"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."
"Hyper-V's management platform falls short in terms of scalability, especially when handling multiple Hyper-V servers. VMware has a central console to pull in all your VM servers, so you can easily manage them all through one console. You can manage servers in Hyper-V's admin centers, but it's not as scalable. It's doable with a couple of Hyper-V servers, but it becomes harder to manage when you get over two or three Hyper-V servers."
"To manage Windows Hyper-V Server 2012, you need an additional server 2012 server."
"I am using the free version of the solution. There are some limited features, and it is not too scalable."
"I would love to see other options for connecting VMs to large data storage."
"Hyper-V is a stable solution, but not as stable as VMware."
"RHEV can improve by keeping pace with new features and new enhancements."
"This solution could be more secure."
"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."
"We would like the dashboard feature of this solution to be improved, as it is not very detailed at present."
"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."
"The solution has a very small lifecycle."
"There are two things that I would like to see improvement in when it comes to Red Hat. First is the pricing and second is the support."
"A few features of the product do not work as well as those in VMware."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's cheap, but not the best."
"There is no cost associated with it if customers are already using Microsoft products."
"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 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."
"Hyper-V is free when you buy Windows Server. You only have to pay for engaging in the management aspect in System Center."
"The product is a bit expensive, but it is worth the money."
"The pricing and licensing is pretty good."
"There is a license required for this solution. I would recommend purchasing the support."
"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 buy a license for commercial use, and we also use the free editions."
"We have to pay extra for vulnerability and fault tolerance."
"Its price depends on the use cases."
"RHEV offers pricing based on a per-physical-machine licensing model."
"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."
"This is an open-source solution."
"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.
920,929 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%
Computer Software Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

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.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.