Hyper-V vs. Proxmox VE

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Hyper-V
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
N/A
$24.95
per month
Proxmox VE
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Proxmox Virtual Environment is an open source server virtualization management solution based on QEMU/KVM and LXC. Users can manage virtual machines, containers, highly available clusters, storage and networks via a web interface or CLI. Proxmox VE code is licensed under the GNU Affero General Public License, version 3. The project is developed and maintained by Proxmox Server Solutions GmbH.
$90
year & CPU socket
Pricing
Hyper-VProxmox VE
Editions & Modules
Developer
$24.95
per month
Bronze
$49.00
per month
Silver
$89.00
per month
Gold
$135.00
per month
Platinum
$199.00
per month
Community
€ 90
year & CPU socket
Basic
€ 280
year & CPU socket
Standard
€ 420
year & CPU socket
Premium
€ 840
year & CPU socket
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Hyper-VProxmox VE
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsProxmox Virtual Environment's source code is published under the free software license GNU AGPL, v3 and thus is freely available for download, use and share. A Proxmox VE Subscription is an additional service program that helps IT professionals and businesses keep Proxmox VE deployments up-to-date. A subscription provides access to the stable Proxmox VE Enterprise Repository delivering software updates and security enhancements, technical help and support.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Hyper-VProxmox VE
Considered Both Products
Hyper-V
Chose Hyper-V
Oracle VirtualBox works just fine on workstations, for testing pourposes. But sometimes the virtual network conflicts with the physical cards on the workstation. VMware is the state of the art, but it costs more than gold, and you will have to license every Windows Server VM …
Chose Hyper-V
Hyper-V is much simpler and less costly the VMWare. Administration is far more intuitive. This reduces cost to implement, and cost to maintain. In our SMB focused environment (10-70 users) the enterprise advantages of VSphere (multi-site, blade / SAN architecture, and …
Chose Hyper-V
VMware ESXi, VMware Fusion, VMware Workstation Pro and AWS Organizations
Chose Hyper-V
VMware Workstation Player and Pro are now free for Small Businesses, but Pro used to be paid and quite expensive. There are compatibility issues between those products and Windows hosts, giving that Microsoft has their own hypervisor platform already. Also, if you use Linux, …
Chose Hyper-V
No extra licensing costs. It's easy to use. We haven't suffered any downtime due to virtualization problems. It's a rock solid solution.
Chose Hyper-V
Considering the maturity of ESXi, Hyper-V is something I would definitely consider using in future jobs or organisations. We selected Hyper-V after many years of using ESXi; several factors led us to this change, including a poor support experience with VMware, and the lower …
Chose Hyper-V
ESXi, to me, seems to do things better in almost every way. It is much quicker to deploy ESXi compared to Hyper-V. I also feel like Hyper-V requires more frequent updates so I'm not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing.
Chose Hyper-V
VMware is the pioneer of virtualization but when you compare it with Hyper-V, VMware lacks the flexibility of hardware customization and configuration options Hyper-V has also GPU virtualization still not adequate for both platforms. VMware has better graphical interface and …
Chose Hyper-V
I switched to VMware Workstation Pro, after using Hyper-V for several years. The thing I missed in Hyper-V was the network management which has too less configuration options compared to VMWare Workstation Pro. Also managing the snapshots was more user-friendly in VMWare …
Chose Hyper-V
The ease of use and essentially free license made the adoption of Hyper-V in some parts of my current and one of my previous organizations a no-brainer.
For sure it's not the best product on the market, but it will do the job just fine in a lot of use cases. Automated …
Chose Hyper-V
Though Docker provides cross-platform support and isolation, Hyper-V provides true virtualization over the host OS and creates boundary over guest OS that protects the security threats, resource-hogging on the host OS.
Chose Hyper-V
While many have additional features or lower overhead the ease of use and low-cost licensing make Hyper-V our preferred choice for most clients. And because we are mostly a Microsoft shop and it is built on Windows when we need to troubleshoot the hypervisor itself we already …
Chose Hyper-V
It is much cheaper and has at least the same functionality as what we use. It integrates better in our Windows environment and it works more familiar with similar tools that we already use. And it is on fewer vendors, much easier for support. Very happy with the switch from …
Chose Hyper-V
Overall, VMWare appears to be more full-featured and perhaps a bit more robust, but the integration and no-cost factors of Hyper-V won the day. We have had no issues with Hyper-V since instigating it five years ago and do not regret the decision.
Chose Hyper-V
Hyper-V is much cheaper and does not have the license requirement of VMware. Hyper-V is not a product that scales like VMware and not well suited to a large datacenter.
Chose Hyper-V
Hyper-V is well suited for environmental testing purposes. Let's say you want to learn or test a new OS for a product or just for learning purposes. You are able to boot up this os in just a few mins on Hyper-V and then start working, testing, and learning with no money out of …
Chose Hyper-V
I used VMware vSphere at another company. However, for infrastructure with only two virtual machines, the VMware license cost is not worth it, because with the Windows Server Standard license you have the possibility to install two virtual servers at no extra cost.
Chose Hyper-V
We selected Hyper-V because it was built in to Windows and had no licensing costs. The functionality was similar, VMware seemed like a more premium product, and had support. But those are the bare minimum when competing with an embedded solution. VMware is reported to be …
Chose Hyper-V
I used to use VMWare and was certified but I have no justification to move off this platform. It is sufficient.
Chose Hyper-V
Hyper-V performs very well in environment running windows operating systems and performs well under various workloads. The replication and recovery features of hyper-v work well but lack some of usability of tools such as Zerto, VMware replication and site recovery manager to …
Chose Hyper-V
You already have to purchase the licensing for Windows Servers so why not bundle that in with the cost of the hypervisor. VMware seems to be a better virtualization platform with a better dashboard, but if you aren't managing hundreds of physical servers across multiple data …
Chose Hyper-V
We went with Hyper-V since it's backed by Microsoft. Most of our businesses use MS, so going with supported products helps when we need to open a case if we run into issues. There are other alternatives, but the ease and support of Hyper-V make it our go-to product for …
Chose Hyper-V
Microsoft's virtualization with Hyper-V has given us a great opportunity to increase the availability of services, thus increasing the satisfaction of our end user. With Microsoft virtualization, we have increased availability as follows:
  • Improved service levels.
  • Reduced …
Chose Hyper-V
Hyper-V is not only a free virtualization solution for businesses, but it's also a very stable and very intuitive environment. The learning curve for Hyper-V is very simple and there are a lot of resources online for Hyper-V. VMWare is actually the leader in the virtualization …
Proxmox VE
Chose Proxmox VE
Proxmox is somewhat more flexible (for being a Linux distro) than VMware. VMWare's network configuration is more robust and well implemented, but it lacks lots of resources that Proxmox has, like ZFS for example. Overall I think both solutions offer good tools and the best …
Chose Proxmox VE
Proxmox Virtual Environment is better, less costly, it has better CAPEX and OPEX, is open source and more robust and flexible.
It is an agnostic product, one can use a PC clone or a high end server to install it, and it works flawlessly on both.
The product has a large life …
Chose Proxmox VE
Based on my experience , I selected Proxmox VE because it offers a range of powerful features and functionalities at a lower cost than proprietary platforms such as VMware ESXi and Citrix Hypervisor. Additionally, Proxmox VE is an open-source platform, which means that users …
Chose Proxmox VE
Proxmox VE is cheaper than VMware, especially upscaling an HA architecture. Compared with other free or less expensive solutions, Proxmox VE is high compatible with more types of hardware solutions and more VM types. From my point of view, Proxmox VE has no competitor at the …
Chose Proxmox VE
Proxmox emulates hardware exceptionally well. This makes migration easier between systems. Additionally, the licensing model is friendly and the system is quite featureful. On top of that, by having a common base (Debian Linux) we have access to tools without needing to jump …
Chose Proxmox VE
well previously we try to find the fast and lite virtualization platform, we try VMware, we try Citrix, but finally we decided to use Proxmox because it suitable for the development software team, fast provision and delete VM, save a lot of time for DevOps Team.
Chose Proxmox VE
With an incredibly easy to use interface, quick setup, and wide support for different hardware we found it was the perfect lab tool for our department to build, stage, and eventually move VMs into production with.
Chose Proxmox VE
We've used VirtualBox on desktop systems. It's great for what it is, but it's a whole different ballgame to Proxmox VE. Proxmox provides the virtualisation, like VirtualBox, but on top of that you get a very well oiled management layer, storage integration, clustering, etc.

Chose Proxmox VE
I have tried VMWare ESXi, as that was free, but then quickly found out that for cluster I needed the paid version.
Hyper-V server was also tried but did not have an easy high available cluster install without creating a separate domain.
XenServer was a great free alternative, but …
Chose Proxmox VE
VMWare pricing is steep when compared to the Proxmox VE licensing model. You can use Proxmox VE GPL for free to fully evaluate every aspect of it. VMWare also requires you to install software on your virtual machine instances to which you wouldn't normally need. Proxmox VE just …
Features
Hyper-VProxmox VE
Server Virtualization
Comparison of Server Virtualization features of Product A and Product B
Hyper-V
7.6
Ratings
6% below category average
Proxmox VE
7.2
Ratings
11% below category average
Virtual machine automated provisioning6.90 Ratings7.00 Ratings
Management console7.70 Ratings7.00 Ratings
Live virtual machine backup8.20 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Live virtual machine migration7.30 Ratings6.00 Ratings
Hypervisor-level security7.80 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Hyper-VProxmox VE
Small Businesses
DigitalOcean Droplets
DigitalOcean Droplets
Score 9.7 out of 10
DigitalOcean Droplets
DigitalOcean Droplets
Score 9.7 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
VMware vSOM (discontinued)
VMware vSOM (discontinued)
Score 10.0 out of 10
VMware vSOM (discontinued)
VMware vSOM (discontinued)
Score 10.0 out of 10
Enterprises
VMware vSOM (discontinued)
VMware vSOM (discontinued)
Score 10.0 out of 10
VMware vSOM (discontinued)
VMware vSOM (discontinued)
Score 10.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Hyper-VProxmox VE
Likelihood to Recommend
8.4
(0 ratings)
8.4
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.9
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Availability
9.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Performance
9.0
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
7.5
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
In-Person Training
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Online Training
9.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
5.0
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Configurability
9.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
7.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
9.0
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Vendor post-sale
9.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale
9.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Hyper-VProxmox VE
Likelihood to Recommend
Hyper-V is well suited to virtualizing low production server count environments without WAN replication or failover on discrete host hardware. It starts to be less competitive in more enterprise environments where WAN replication or SAN / Blade architecture is preferred. Scalability via dynamic resource allocation also does not seem to be as functional as the large V competition, although I have limited experience implementing this in either product.
Read full review
Proxmox VE is a virtualization platform that provides a range of features and functionalities suitable for various scenarios. Here are some specific scenarios where Proxmox VE is well suited and some scenarios where it might not be the best choice:Well-suited scenarios:Virtualization of server workloads: Proxmox VE is well suited for virtualizing server workloads such as web servers, mail servers, database servers, and other similar applications. Its high-performance virtualization capabilities allow these workloads to run smoothly and efficiently.Hosting multiple virtual machines (VMs): Proxmox VE is ideal for hosting multiple VMs on a single server. It provides efficient resource management, allowing users to easily allocate resources to each VM.Clustered environments: Proxmox VE is a great choice for clustered environments. It supports clustering and can easily manage multiple servers, providing high availability and load balancing for mission-critical applications. Less appropriate scenarios: Limited hardware resources: Proxmox VE requires significant hardware resources to run efficiently. If you have limited hardware resources, it might not be the best choice. Simple applications: If you only need to run a single, simple application, Proxmox VE might be overkill. Other virtualization platforms or even a basic web hosting service might be more appropriate.
Read full review
Pros
  • Easy to use GUI - very easy for someone with sufficient Windows experience - not necessarily a system administrator.
  • Provisioning VMs with different OSes - we mostly rely on different flavors of Windows Server, but having a few *nix distributions was not that difficult.
  • Managing virtual networks - we usually have 1 or 2 VLANs for our business purposes, but we are happy with the outcomes.
Read full review
  • ZFS storage out of the box. The integration with ZFS is fantastic. You can easily create pools to store your VM images and data on, and the Proxmox web UI provides an easy way to check drive health, ZFS scrub status, etc.
  • Great web UI. Practically everything configurable is available to do so from the web user interface. You'll rarely need to drop to the command line for administrative tasks, unless you want to, in which case you can do that too. The UI also provides graphs and visualisations to help you keep check of how everything is performing.
  • Easy to setup a high availability cluster. Although Proxmox VE works perfectly well on a single server, you can also install it on multiple hosts and setup a cluster.
  • Uses a Debian core system with an Ubuntu based kernel. This means everything to do with the base operating system is tried and trusted. We use a lot of Debian and Ubuntu installs, so having this run underneath Proxmox VE was an added bonus for us.
Read full review
Cons
  • We manage Hyper-V using both System Center Virtual Machine Manager (SCVMM) and the in-build Hyper-V administration tool, the former being the main product we use as the built-in tool is very light on functionality, unlike VMware ESXi.
  • Management of storage is not great and quite a shift away from how VMware does it with ESXi; there is no separate panel/blade/window for LUNs/data stores, which means there is a lot of back and forth when trying to manage storage.
  • A dedicated client with all functionality in one place would be awesome.
  • Having the equivalent of ESXi's virtual console is something which is absolutely needed.
Read full review
  • The web UI does not work as well on mobile devices. It is useable, but a mobile optimised / responsive UI would be nice to have. There is a mobile app, so that may alleviate this issue, but I have not yet tried it.
  • Support in the community forums could be better. There are paid support plans, but new users trying out the software will not have access to this. Answers to questions can sometimes be terse, and I can imagine this may put some people off.
  • The wiki is a bit hit and miss with certain topics. I've often seen outdated or missing information, and the whole thing looks like it could do with some polish. I'd love to see it opened up for the community to add to.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Cheap and easy is the name of the game. It has great support, it doesn't require additional licenses, it works the same if it is a cluster or stand-alone, and all the servers can be centrally managed from a system center virtual machine manager server, even when located at remote sites.
Read full review
Proxmox VE provides the most capable, yet stable virtualization platform in the market today. Licensing options are also competitive and cost-effective for support, and support is extremely fast and knowledgable of getting issues resolved as quickly and soundly as possible.
Read full review
Usability
It is very easy to configure new virtual machines and manage them. But you have to use different interfaces to perform various tasks. Especially as soon as it comes to clustering you have to use at least two different interfaces (Hyper-V Manager and Failover-Cluster Manager) to perform all necessary tasks. The newly released Windows Admin Center is a way into the right direction to get all management tasks into one single interface.
Read full review
The interface is easy to use for most of it, but still lacks screens for some configurations. Also, a few of the screens are not as intuitive as they could be. This is specially true with disk and network configuration, where some graphic/visual representations of the configurations would be very useful
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
In the past 2 years our Hyper-V servers have only had a handful of instances where the VM's on them were unreachable and the physical Hyper-V server had to be restarted. One time this was due to a RAM issue with the physical box and was resolved when we stopped using dynamic memory in Hyper-V. The other times were after updates were installed and the physical box was not restarted after the updates were installed.
Read full review
Proxmox VE's ha-cluster functionality is very much improved, though does have a not-very-often occurrence of failure. In a 2-node cluster of Proxmox VE, HA can fail causing an instance that is supposed to migrate between the two nodes stop and fail until manually recovered through the command-line tools provided. Other than this, the HA clustering capability of Proxmox VE has proven to be reliable in 3 or more clustered environments with much less chance of these failures to occur.
Read full review
Performance
Hyper-V itself works quickly and rarely gave performance issues but this can be more attributed to the physical server specifications that the actual Hyper-V software in my opinion as Hyper-V technically just utilizes config files such as xml, and a data drive file (VHD, VHDX, etc) to perform its' duties.
Read full review
Proxmox VE's interfacing is always fast to load, both the Web interface and the command-line tool interfaces. Reporting is practically real time almost all the time, and you can see everything in mere seconds, easily able to identify if something is wrong or it everything is in tip-top shape as always desired
Read full review
Support Rating
I gave it a middle of the road rating - as far as getting direct help from Microsoft this never seems to happen. (Good luck getting ahold of them.) Getting help from online support forums is pretty much where I get all my help from. Hyper-V is used quite widely and anything you could need help with is out there and easily searched for on your favorite search engine.
Read full review
They are fast, understanding, very intelligent, know their product very well, fast, responsive, and concise. Need I say more?
Read full review
In-Person Training
We had in person training from a third party and while it was very in depth it was at a beginner's level and by the time we received the training we had advanced past this level so it was monotonous and redundant at that point. It was good training though and would have provided a solid foundation for learning the rest of Hyper-V had I had it from the beginning.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Online Training
The training was easy to read and find. There were good examples in the training and it is plentiful if you use third party resources also. It is not perfect as sometimes you may have a specific question and have to spend time learning or in the rare case you get an error you might have to research that error code which could have multiple causes.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
initial configuration of hyper-v is intuitive to anyone familiar with windows and roles for basic items like single server deployments, storage and basic networking. the majority of the problems were with implementing advanced features like high availability and more complex networking. There is a lot of documentation on how to do it but it is not seamless, even to experienced virtualization professionals.
Read full review
It worked, was easy and super fast to deploy, and provided everything we needed in a matter of minutes
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Oracle VirtualBox works just fine on workstations, for testing pourposes. But sometimes the virtual network conflicts with the physical cards on the workstation. VMware is the state of the art, but it costs more than gold, and you will have to license every Windows Server VM hosted on it. EC2 as well; it will require an individual Microsoft Windows Server licence.
Read full review
Proxmox Virtual Environment is better, less costly, it has better CAPEX and OPEX, is open source and more robust and flexible.
It is an agnostic product, one can use a PC clone or a high end server to install it, and it works flawlessly on both.
The product has a large life cycle, is stable and has few problems and vulnerabilities than the other propietary products.
Read full review
Scalability
Nothing is perfect but Hyper-V does a great job of showing the necessary data to users to ensure that there is enough resources to perform essential functions. You can also select what fields show on the management console which is helpful for a quick glance. There are notifications that can be set up and if things go unnoticed and a Hyper-V server runs out of a resource it will safely and quickly shut down the VM's it needs to in order to ensure no Hardware failure or unnecessary data loss.
Read full review
Proxmox VE provides everything you need to quickly add new storage mediums, network and local, as well as networking interfaces, such as using Linux standard bridges and now Open-vSwitch bridges which can be even more scalable than before. Proxmox VE 4.0 dropped support for OpenVZ in favor of the more well supported and native LXC and made an upgrade path to it very simple.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • With Hyper-V implementing new software or rules on a test, beds take fewer resources and time which is a great bonus.
  • Virtual SAN management and Virtual Switch management make it easy to manage network and storage options.
  • Editing the disk option made us resize disks on the fly and saved us maintenance, production time, and costs.
Read full review
  • Due to the open source nature of Proxmox, we have no licensing costs while training our employees
  • We've migrated 100% of our clients to Proxmox and have found improved uptime, and flexibility.
  • In the 10 years of using Proxmox, we've yet to lose any data or not be notified of backup issues.
Read full review
ScreenShots