Nutanix AHV is presented as a modern and secure virtualization platform that powers VMs and containers for applications and cloud-native workloads on-premises and in public clouds. Its tools and automated workflows simplify the day-to-day administration of VMs and containers.
N/A
VMware ESXi
Score 7.7 out of 10
N/A
A bare-metal hypervisor that installs directly onto a physical server. With direct access to and control of underlying resources, VMware ESXi partitions hardware to consolidate applications and cut costs.
50/50, not much in it, to be honest. Nutanix AOS wins on the support, training, and certification ease but Dell / EMC has the name and integration support with its other products (e.g., Nutanix not supporting Networkers hot add mode).
By far, in my opinion, Nutanix AOS is heads above VMware. From the creation of a VM to updating the nodes themselves, Nutanix AOS is so much easier, faster, and just an overall better product. I would choose Nutanix AOS over VMware any day.
VMware ESXi has been around much longer and because of this is much more fully featured. However, on the flip side, it then makes Nutanix AOS much less complicated to operate. Nutanix AOS online support (and knowledge base articles) are very well written and comprehensive. …
Nutanix [AOS] is a hyper-converged solution, and in the vSphere it was originally designed for the use of SAN, although they also have a hyper-converged solution. But the architecture and load testing showed the inconsistency of the hyper-converged solution from VMware.
As mentioned before I feel that Nutanix meets or exceeds the capabilities of the competition, where that is in ease of use, how well they support their platform, upgrading software, migrating VM's from another hypervisor to Nutanix or simply moving VM's between one Nutanix …
There are other clustering solutions, to be sure. And there are significantly less expensive solutions for preventing downtime, such as Hyper-V replication, which is what I was using before Nutanix. But Nutanix is in the upper-right of the Gartner magic quadrant for …
We looked at both Simplivity and Cisco Hyperflex. Both are pretty good in their own right. Simplivity was very 'efficient' in the way they handled data, but we didn't like the idea of a propitiatory hardware card. Cisco's Hyperflex was our second choice, but we were so …
Neither of these two products have really been a 100% replacement for VMware ESXi but they are getting closer and closer and with the new licensing agreements that VMware is trying to push out, could start eating at the lower hanging fruit. VMware ESXi still has some nicer …
VMware stacks really well compared to competitors as it has a good reputation in the markets, and clients trust the virtual machines in regard to their data. It also provides better reliability and performance as compared to the competitors, which makes it a clear choice for …
I think it is better than Hyper-V. The gap has possibly narrowed, but it is a more robust product. Time will tell if that stays the same after being acquired.
While running through a proof of concept with Hyper-V and VMware ESXi, I found VMware ESXi to be much easier to deploy, administer, and work with overall. Both products are good but I personally found ESXi to be more intuitive to use and the deployment options were also more …
VMware ESXI is straight forward dependable hypervisor, with some users experience consistent server uptime even during hardware failure and other setbacks. It requires few hardware resources, making a minimal impact on its host machine. Deploying new servers with VMware ESXI is …
At the time we did our comparison we found that VMware scaled much better than Hyper-V, lighter weight, and much more reliable. My recommendation if Hyper-V is needed for anything such as Windows containers, is to use nested virtualization and installing Windows Hyper-V within …
VMware ESXi excels in comparison to Microsoft's offering due to integration with Linux, its bare metal approach and its ability to function off of a thinner hypervisor. It allows for better integration with application appliances in my opinion due to its non-Microsoft nature. …
While Hyper-V also can work very well and can have licensing benefits, it does rely on Windows in order to run. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it can add another layer of potential failure and might not be running on as low of a level as ESXi does. The footprint for …
It's hard to beat Hyper-V when it comes to ESXi. Although Hyper-V costs nothing to use, it does require a Windows license that permits you to operate at least two virtual machines (VMs) on the Hyper-V server. I found that VMware ESXi consumes fewer resources than any other …
VMware ESXi is a lot more robust and resilient than MS Hyper-V. However, Hyper-V is more convenient and economical because it comes with Windows Server.
The vSphere management interface is going to be web-based and you access that through a web browser by browsing to the IO address of the VMware ESXi host itself and then from there you'll be prompted for a login screen.
As long as you're using Nutanix AOS on Nutanix hardware and are paying their software support fees, AOS is a valid competitor to VMware and can save money due to not needing a license and having their server management system built into the base host management system. If you …
Compared to VirtualBox, VMware ESXi feels a lot more enterprise-grade when comparing the two. As ESXi is a VMware product we knew the level of quality and support we would receive from the vendor. VirtualBox is an open-source platform for virtualization and we liked the fact …
VMware ESXi stacks up nicely against Hyper-v. VMware ESXi is a smaller footprint, the one thing Hyper-v has is cost it is free with the purchase of a windows license that allows you to run at least two windows VM's within the Hyper-v server. But VMware ESXi is still the leader …
Hyper-V utilizes more resources compared to ESXi and it gets affected when it is used to scale up and installation on Microsoft windows is easy however it does not stand to the ease of access of ESXi, a user of ESXi would find it difficult to migrate to another application.
VMware has been the #1 vendor for virtualization for 10 years, is used in top incorporations, supports almost every software around there, and runs smoothly with every hardware vendor. The con is the price, it's the most expensive solution.
Easy to manage, standard licenses and bundle licenses are customizable, provides a much more stable infrastructure. Cost-effective, Comes with special features like HA, DRS, FT.
Much more reliable and well-integrated than competitors, with a solid central management console. Citrix is having good performance but requires a specific kernel to leverage, HyperV is good only for windows OS.
The main issue I found with Hyper-V is that it has to run on top of Microsoft Windows. This obviously uses a considerable amount of resources, even without "Desktop mode". With ESXi running on a linux based OS, this allows the maximisation of the available resources and a much …
Nutanix AOS and VMware ESXi are both products for IT virtualization, but they differ substantially. VMware ESXi is a bare-metal hypervisor intended as the foundation of a virtualized server system. By contrast, Nutanix AOS is a comprehensive hyper-converged infrastructure (HCI) solution that combines a hypervisor with software-defined storage and networking. Mid-size and enterprise-level organizations make up the bulk of customers for both products, probably because smaller businesses are less likely to need or have the budget for IT virtualization products.
Features
Although both VMware ESXi and Nutanix AOS provide virtualized hardware benefits such as minimal physical footprints and reliable server uptime, they differ heavily in their scope and feature set.
Most customers find VMware ESXi to be a rock-solid hypervisor. Users report that it’s reliable and stable, with some users enjoying years of consistent server uptime in spite of hardware failures. It’s also efficient in its use of hardware resources, taking up a very small footprint on its host machine. VMware ESXi makes it fast and easy to deploy new servers, whether you use an existing configuration file or configure the server from scratch. VMware also provides detailed hardware compatibility guidelines to help choose the right hardware when it’s time to upgrade.
Nutanix AOS, on the other hand, is a complete HCI solution with software-defined storage, compute, and networking functionality. Nutanix provides a one-click upgrade system for their platform, making upgrades a painless experience for most users. Its single-pane-of-glass management interface is useful for IT administrators, and customers report solid server uptimes, a high degree of hardware fault tolerance, and reliable disaster recovery options. When customers do encounter problems, they generally report fast, useful assistance from Nutanix’s support team.
Limitations
Both Nutanix AOS and VMware ESXi are strong in their own categories, but they’re not free from problems. It’s important to consider their drawbacks before implementing one or the other.
Nutanix AOS can suffer from a rocky setup experience. Users migrating from existing HCI systems report an especially rough start, even with support from Nutanix. Although many users appreciate the one-click upgrade system, it’s not perfect, and can encounter unexpected failures with certain drivers and hardware. Additionally, the GUI and command-line interface aren’t at full parity, forcing users to switch between interfaces for specific functionality.
VMware ESXi, of course, isn’t a complete solution on its own. It’s most effective as part of a larger virtualization ecosystem, and that costs money. Licensing VMwareESXi can get expensive fast, especially when you need higher subscription tiers or additional VMware products to get the features you want. Users also commonly have issues with its web-based management client, which may not work properly on all browsers. And while VMware’s hardware compatibility guidelines may be comprehensive, they’re detailed for good reason: VMware ESXi can be very picky about the hardware it can run on, which could bump up the price of implementation if existing hardware doesn’t fit the bill.
Pricing
Nutanix AOS offers a free Community Edition with limited functionality intended for internal and non-production usage only. Pricing for Nutanix AOS is available via a quote from the vendor.
VMware ESXi is available as part of VMware’s vSphere product, which has a free vSphere Hypervisor edition limited to a single physical server. vSphere has multiple packages, tiers, and subscription levels with differing capabilities, ranging from $510 to over $20,000. For full pricing information, refer to the vSphere pricing page.
Features
Nutanix AHV
VMware ESXi
Server Virtualization
Comparison of Server Virtualization features of Product A and Product B
[Nutanix AOS] is good when you need easy scaling and high reliability. The good architecture of the solution allows to solve the tasks set for the platform. This solution allows to reduce the number of personnel serving the infrastructure due to the ease of management and a good knowledge base. As a disadvantage, I would attribute the complexity of customizing some types of loads to optimal work on DFS, for example, high-load databases.
If you're looking for the industry standard in server virtualization, I would recommend ESXi. After decades of expertise in the field, VMware continues to provide a strong product, production-ready, with an easy-to-learn interface that allows for quick management along with less costly upfront onboarding and training. Grab the free personal-use license and install in your homelab to start!
Management of VMs on AHV take some getting used to. It's just a list of VMs that are displayed, and you search through it. Not the normal folder structure that I'm used to in VMware.
Also can't disable a NIC card in a VM in AHV. Very handy feature present in VMware.
Larger workloads may have to be tweaked to get the performance you need/want.
There are some odd issues with VMware's virtualized network drive (VMXNET3). On occasion, after a reboot of a Windows-based VM the NIC will fail to bind properly and network access is unavailable until an admin intervenes by disabling/re-enabling the adapter. While it's possible that our environment is a contributing factor, this never happens on VMs using Intel E1000 emulation, only the paravirtual NICs.
Logging is extensive but difficult to work with. VMware's solution is a product called Log Insight, which comes at additional cost. Fortunately this is somewhat mitigated by the extensive support documentation and robust user community, but in the heat of the moment obtaining the required detail can be a trying experience.
We made a huge financial investment with this platform (four clusters, all-flash storage array), so we're in it for the long haul. Luckily it's a beast. I've had to use support more than any other platform I've administered, but the help has been very good. Nutanix continues to add features and innovations which increase the ROI
It is critical to our business, what started out as a way to do certain functions, it has now become core to ensuring our product is available to our customers and reducing our costs to operate and reduce our recovery time and provisioning servers. Their support is great and the costs to renew is reasonable.
Nutanix Prism Element and Prism Central are easy-to-use HTML5-based web consoles. The layout makes sense; you're only a few clicks away from getting to where you need to be. The AHV hypervisor is integrated into the platform for a fast and seamless experience. Rich data on VM metrics is also available.
The interface is fairly intuitive for most things, and the areas that are a little less obvious usually have fantastic documentation in the online knowledgebase. In 3-4 years of managing our ESXi hosts, I think that I have only opened 4-5 support cases for things that I could not figure out myself or find answers to on the website.
Without the need to patch the servers with bug fixes and enhancements we whave not experienced any downtime with VMware issues. Even the bug fixes and updates do not cause of downtime as we just migrate the servers to the opposite node and update the one and then move servers back. Very simple and painless.
The performance is very impressive. I am used to VMware and the snapshots were taking 10 minutes. The first time I had to restore from a snapshot on Nutanix it took 5 seconds and I couldn't believe it. Everything done on the server is fast. Powering on VM is done in seconds compared.to what we were using before.
We do not notice any difference between a physical and virtual server running the same workload. In fact we can scale quicker with the virtual server than we can with the physical.
Our first support ticket to Nutanix was responded to within 10 minutes of submission. That was kind of impressive. They have worldwide support so that when a support request is created, support is acknowledged in a relative short amount of time.
I rarely ever need support for anything VMWare makes, but when I do, the documentation available just in the free community is generally enough. It's extensive and the community is truly robust and active. And if you have a myvmware account, you can get support for your owned products from VMWare support by the conventional case/ticket method
Jsut read and follow anything your storage provider may require to allow the integration of VMware with storage operations, outside of that VMware jsut works.
By far, in my opinion, Nutanix AOS is heads above VMware. From the creation of a VM to updating the nodes themselves, Nutanix AOS is so much easier, faster, and just an overall better product. I would choose Nutanix AOS over VMware any day.
While Hyper-V also can work very well and can have licensing benefits, it does rely on Windows in order to run. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it can add another layer of potential failure and might not be running on as low of a level as ESXi does. The footprint for Hyper-V can be smaller if the Desktop Experience isn't used for the hosts, but this is the default fashion that ESXi has been running for many years. VMware's support has always been stellar, and its documentation is phenomenal. Hyper-V can work as a virtual environment option, but ESXi has never let me down in any environment I have managed. I will continue standing by this product and prefer it over other options. It has proven itself time and time again over time as the defacto virtual environment hosting platform.
We started out with a two-server cluster and adding a third or fourth is very straightforward and simple with no issues. You just need to be aware of the size of your Vcenter Server to handle the workload, but still the resources needed is very minimal
Positively, it has saved us time in spinning up new servers for the different departments in our company. It is easy for us to spin up virtual machines with VMware ESXi and deploy applications at the drop of a hat.
Positively we are able to save space in our data closets as we no longer need to keep room for physical servers and workstations, allowing us to expand in other areas like networking equipment and physical backup solutions.
It has moved our business forward as we are able to migrate old servers and static workstations in the virtual environment allowing us to easily keep an eye on older applications and update/backup easily through VMware ESXi management console.