Hyper-V. Rock solid environment for your VM's
Hyper-V is used to host on-premise servers, is hosting Windows servers and Linux servers.It provides an easy virtualization environment …
Starting at $24.95 per month
View PricingOverview
Recent Reviews
Awards
Products that are considered exceptional by their customers based on a variety of criteria win TrustRadius awards. Learn more about the types of TrustRadius awards to make the best purchase decision. More about TrustRadius Awards
Popular Features
- Live virtual machine backup (62)9.595%
- Hypervisor-level security (65)8.989%
- Live virtual machine migration (65)8.484%
- Management console (70)6.767%
Reviewer Pros & Cons
Pricing
Developer
$24.95
Cloud
per month
Bronze
$49.00
Cloud
per month
Silver
$89.00
Cloud
per month
Entry-level set up fee?
- No setup fee
Offerings
- Free Trial
- Free/Freemium Version
- Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Product Demos
Installation demo of GUI for Hyper-V 2012, 2012 R2 & 2016 Core
YouTube
hyper v windows 10 - virtual machine | Microsoft Hyper-V (tutorial)
YouTube
Hyper-V Dynamic Memory and Remote FX Demo
YouTube
vtUtilities Demo
YouTube
Configuring and running the AX 2012 Hyper-V image with VirtualBox
YouTube
Step 2 - Setting up the Hyper-V Admin Console using RSAT for Windows 7
YouTube
Features
Return to navigation
Product Details
- About
- Integrations
- Tech Details
What is Hyper-V?
Hyper-V Integrations
Hyper-V Technical Details
| Deployment Types | Software as a Service (SaaS), Cloud, or Web-Based |
|---|---|
| Operating Systems | Unspecified |
| Mobile Application | No |
Comparisons
Compare with
Reviews and Ratings
(270)Attribute Ratings
Reviews
(1-2 of 2)Companies can't remove reviews or game the system. Here's why
March 23, 2022
Microsoft Hyper-v pluses and minuses
Hyper-V is used in our environment for test and development environments as well as VDI infrastructure and WDS image maintenance. Hyper-V is used as a lower-cost alternative to VMWare that can be installed and used on our existing Windows infrastructure. The infrastructure is used primarily by our development team.
- Lower cost
- Virtualization of Windows servers
- VDI infrastructure of Windows desktop
- Flexible
- Networking
- Managability
- Add-on tools
- lower TCO
- High availability
- relative ease of use.
70%
7.0
- Flexible, able to handle multiple workloads.
- It has compatibility with Windows.
- Cost of licensing the product in comparison to other alternatives.
- Setup is sometimes confusing and VMware knowledge does not always translate well.
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 perform tasks such as disaster recover testing. The user interface of hyper-v combined with Microsoft failover clustering can be very confusing and difficult to validate. this can cause unintended outages due to misconfigure items such as cluster-aware storage.
10
My current environment is used for testing of windows patching and other Windows specific items. Hyper-v is also used for creation and maintenance of WDS images for desktop deployment. My past employer used Hyper-v for production and near production environments with offsite replication and a 2 node cluster.
2
People who manage Hyper-v will need a wide array of knowledge in multipl IT areas such as storage, networking, virtualization, operating systems, Windows clustering, security principles and other Widows specific technology. so, the best person would be someone with a broad array of knowledge in multiple disciplines with a firm understanding of virtualization.
- pre-production testing
- need for "cheap" virtualization
- easy deployment
- management of WDS images
- offsite replication without 3rd party tools
- reduced TCO
- replacement of vmware in production to save cost
No
We evaluate several alternatives to hyper-v including MS virtual desktop, open source virtualization tools and VMWare
- Price
- Product Usability
- Prior Experience with the Product
Hyper-v was used in a test environment by my second employer and was selected primarily due to the cost of VMWare. We were able to use virtualization to spin up test environments or near production environments without the need to purchase very expensive VMWare liceses as used in production while maintaining most of the features and usability.
The main issue that I had was with learning how to enable features and to configure the environment with high availability enabled. I found that, where VMware is very intuitive via VCenter and clustering, the Hyper-v interface did not always perform in the way that it should. this ultimately resulted in an outage in that environment.
- Implemented in-house
No
Change management was minimal
Due to the learning curve of Hyper-v in a high availabilty environment, I discovered the importance of change management when performing tasks such as server migrations and failovers as opposed to how it is done in a VMWare environment. This was learned the hard way due to an outage caused by a failed server migration within the same cluster.
- configuring clusters
- outage due to misconfiguration
- convincing management
Our Support was through Microsoft Volume licensing and was running on Microsoft Windows Server Datacenter. This gave us premium support for the Windows feature set including Hyper-v.
No
NA
- Management interface
- VM Storage management
- Networking
- High Availability
- Disk resizing
- networking with multiple VLANs
October 07, 2015
Easy and Cheap, what's not to love?
We use Hyper-V as the hypervisor at all of our company offices, with multiple clusters hosting approximately 150 virtual servers. We have recently replace dVMWare with Hyper-V due to cost considerations as well as ease of use. Hyper-V was already included in our Microsoft license agreement and includes features that were very expensive through VMWare. We have found that Hyper-V was very easy to use because its interface is built on Windows, which our technicians were already familiar with after using it on most of our servers.
- Hyper-V allows you to do replicas to another hyper-v server.
- Hyper-V in clustered mode is easy to setup and easy to manage.
- Hyper-V allows you to seamlessly migrate servers to other Hyper-V instances even at other sites.
- Hyper-V allows for seamless integration to Microsoft Azure for a could solution.
- Occasionally there are issues that need to be resolved that prevent online migration of a single VM to another host.
- SCVMM is needed to optimize a cluster and have it automatically spread the VMs out across a cluster.
- Hyper-V supports SMB 3.0, but it must be a Microsoft SMB solution for backups and use of a quorum drive.
100%
10.0
- We have realized savings of $50K a year in the elimination of VMWare fees.
- We have realized savings of $100K a year in reduction of hardware.
- We have realized faster recovery times in full VM restores from backups.
- We have realized better backout plans for changes using checkpoints on the VMs before making a change.
Hyper-V is MUCH cheaper and includes all the features without needing to purchase additional features. We have also found it much easier to install and manage, and it has eliminated the need to hire consultants in our business to help manage our virtual infrastructure. We have teamed our Hyper-V with Tintri storage solutions to make our implementation [is] simple which has also reduced the labor costs needed to manage the VM infrastructure and storage.
1600
We have all of our users on servers that are virtualized on Hyper-V. We have 5 people that are able to manage the Hyper-V servers and clusters. No training was necessary for the administrators as Hyper-V is easy to use, and there was ample information on the internet when questions arose.
5
The people that support Hyper-V are network or system administrators. No additional training was necessary to use Hyper-V. The management product of System Center Virtual Machine Manager is a bit more complicated and a training course would have been nice, but we were able to get through it with a lot of Google searches.
- All of our servers have been virtualized without complication on Hyper-V.
- We set up multiple clusters at each physical site and used replication for disaster recovery purposes.
- We have used Hyper-V to replace VMWare to gain additional features with no extra costs.
- Using Hyper-V replication for disaster recovery to an alternate site helped to meet that need with no additional costs.
- We are able to use live migration to replace hardware and upgrade software with no downtime to users.
- We use Checkpoints to take a quick image of the server before any upgrades and we can revert in seconds if there are problems.
- We plan on adding an on-ramp to Azure to handle unexpected loads when hardware is not quickly available.
- We would like to use virtual hardware from vendors that produce Hyper-V versions of load balancers, firewalls, etc.
- We would like to use the Hyper-V clusters to replace the underlying hardware with no outages to users.
Yes
We replaced VMWare ESIx 5.0 through 5.5. We realized an instant $30,000 a year savings in license costs. We also saved through no longer needing to hire consultants to help with VMWare upgrades and management which saved about $20,000 a year. Finally, we were able to get a lot of features that we were not currently paying for that made our lives easier.
- Price
- Product Features
- Product Usability
- Prior Experience with the Product
- Third-party Reviews
The single most important factor was price, but past experience with the product also proved very valuable. Although many of the reviews have stated that VMWare was a better product until Server 2012 R2, now the reviews show that the products are neck and neck. I would have to say that due to the price advantage and number of features included, that Hyper-V has the upper hand at this point.
We would migrate faster than we did. It was easy to change and the cost savings were instant. Sometimes you hear that a product has a great ROI, but it takes years to realize and is hard to quantify. These savings are instant and easy to quantify. Changing to a next level SAN product like Tintri at the same time helped us see even more savings. Upper level management couldn't be happier with the move. No regrets here!
Yes
It is nice that Hyper-V support comes from Microsoft which is also the vendor of the operating systems for the hosts and the VMs. It makes it a one stop for support for any problems that we may experience. The downfall is that it costs $499 for a support incident, and that it can take up to two hours for a call back during a mission critical outage, but problems are few and far between.
Yes
There are a few bugs with SMB 3.0 and non-Microsoft SMB 3.0 providers. I am still waiting on a couple of the fixes, but there are work-arounds, so there are no critical issues. There are also a couple of bugs in the virtual machine conversion tool in SCVMM, but Microsoft has produced a stand-alone tool that works much better anyways.
When needing to convert from VMware to Hyper-V and the conversion tool in SCVMM would not work, they were quick to point me to the stand-alone conversion tool that was able to do the job better and was able to run from any location instead of just the SCVMM management server.