Access your Pro+ Content below.
Hyper-V vs. VMware: Which is cheaper?
This article is part of the Virtual Data Center issue of April 2009, Vol. 9
Microsoft claims that Hyper-V is cheaper than VMware . But there are several hidden costs that, depending on the user scenario, may make VMware the more cost-effective option, analysts and users say. Microsoft touts Hyper-V as a lower-priced virtualization option than VMware's ESXi, but for straight server consolidation, it's unclear whether Hyper-V is that much cheaper than VMware because of Hyper-V's system requirements and lower consolidation ratios. For more on pricing and virtualization features: Virtualization pricing wars: The future of VMware, Hyper-V and Xen Virtualization pricing news you can use Assessing Hyper-V's benefits, limitations Management features aside, VMware boasts higher consolidation ratios than does Hyper-V and can run on older CPU models, while Hyper-V runs only on the latest -- and most expensive -- CPUs with virtualization-assist technology, and it uses more physical memory per virtual machine than ESX. IT managers who want to figure out the ROI they can achieve from using virtualization for server...
Access this PRO+ Content for Free!
By submitting your email address, you agree to receive emails regarding relevant topic offers from TechTarget and its partners. You can withdraw your consent at any time. Contact TechTarget at 275 Grove Street, Newton, MA.
Features in this issue
Move from conservative to aggressive VM placement and reap the server consolidation benefits while maintaining performance.
On paper, Microsoft's Hyper-V costs less than VMware ESXi, but several gotchas drive up its overall cost.
Server virtualization is an obvious money-saver, but you still need to calculate return on investment. There are often hidden costs that will affect your virtualization ROI.