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

Hyper-V vs RHEV comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 6, 2024

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
37
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Server Virtualization Software category, the mindshare of Hyper-V is 19.5%, up from 14.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RHEV is 2.4%, down from 3.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Server Virtualization Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Hyper-V19.5%
RHEV2.4%
Other78.1%
Server Virtualization Software
 

Featured Reviews

Tomas Basus - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
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

"The virtualization aspect of the solution functions similar to VMware is one of its most valuable features…It is a stable product."
"The product is not difficult to set up."
"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 chose this solution because of the pricing and the simplicity of the product."
"It is actually very low on resources. It doesn't use many resources. It is also very easy to tailor. You can change things like the amount of memory and storage on the fly. It is very stable and reliable. I like its replication feature, which is very good. It is also very easy to move the virtual machines across push servers without any difficulty. Its performance is also very good. Now with this pandemic, a lot of workers are working from home. A lot of workers have been using laptops as their desktop computers, and they would remote into a virtual PC. There is no difficulty, and they can't tell the difference between this and the real one. It is much easier to manage."
"The best hypervisor in the market!"
"The initial setup is not difficult at all. It is very easy."
"The simplicity and intuitiveness of the platform. It was a very simple adaptation, if you have any experience in virtualization."
"Performance and security are key advantages of RHEV."
"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."
"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 can control and manage everything. I know everything that's cooking inside. This is the best part for me."
"The solution is stable."
"They are so advanced today and so mature in what they do that they could easily give any top-notch industry leaders a run for their money."
"The solution is overall very good with all the facilities, it is user friendly, easy to configure, has documentation, and support is available."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support portal."
 

Cons

"Microsoft tech support is horrible."
"They could turn it into a product because that's the problem with it. It doesn't have a single place where you can manage things, and you have to go into all different screens to be able to configure it."
"Hyper-V isn't a lightweight solution like VMware. Management could be more straightforward. Even as far as disk management tools are concerned, it would be better if that could be made simpler. The same applies to performance."
"We've had many issues with Hyper-V's stability, including resource crunches and memory leakage."
"Hyper-V requires improvement with manageability."
"Hyper-V has limitations. When one server or one virtual machine fails, or one is turned off, the virtualization stops, and we have to initiate again with human intervention."
"The area revolving around operations in the product has certain shortcomings where improvements are required."
"Microsoft increased the price for this solution when adding the Storage Spaces Direct feature."
"If you wanted to go to the desktop computer side of things, it lags behind in that you need to go to something like Fedora to get all the extra bells and whistles."
"I found it a bit more difficult to manage than version seven, which was much easier."
"We should improve how we manage storage domains and make more comprehensive control available through the command line."
"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."
"While everything needs improvement in some way, I have no specifics."
"Red Hat by itself is not scalable. But you can have third party add-ons like Ceph to make it massively scalable."
"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 initial setup is not simple or straightforward. It's very complex."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I do not have any comments about pricing or licensing of the product."
"There is a license required for this solution. I would recommend purchasing the support."
"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 expensive."
"The product comes with Windows Server."
"I would not say that it is a totally reasonably priced product as it is merged with our overall costs associated with Microsoft products. We bought some enterprise licenses for our company's data center for Windows Server 2019."
"We previously used VMware, but we switched because Hyper-V is cheaper and delivers the same stability for less money."
"The tool's pricing is cheap."
"I believe we pay on a yearly basis."
"RHEV offers pricing based on a per-physical-machine licensing model."
"We are using the free version of Red Hat."
"We have to pay extra for vulnerability and fault tolerance."
"This is an open-source solution."
"We buy a license for commercial use, and we also use the free editions."
"The solution does not require licencing but a subscription is necessary, which is very affordable."
"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.
894,807 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%
Computer Software Company
10%
University
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business70
Midsize Enterprise37
Large Enterprise46
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: April 2026.
894,807 professionals have used our research since 2012.