Proxmox VE Reviews

We are a service provider and we use Proxmox VE. We use the virtualizer mainly.

The most valuable feature of Proxmox VE is its ease of use.

The virtualizer in Proxmox VE could improve.

I have been using Proxmox VE for approximately one month.

I rate the stability of Proxmox VE a seven out of ten.

I do not have any users yet but I have 10 potential users.

I rate the scalability of Proxmox VE an eight out of ten.

I rate the support from Proxmox VE a nine out of ten.

The initial setup of Proxmox VE is complex. The full deployment took many weeks and I am still configuring it.

I rate the initial setup of Proxmox VE a seven out of ten.

We used two people for the deployment of the solution.

The price of the solution is priced low.

There is a one-time purchase to use this solution.

I rate the price of Proxmox VE a seven out of ten.

I rate Proxmox VE an eight out of ten.

We are using Proxmox VE for our internal services, we have a few virtual machines that run our mail servers, call center solutions, TDX, and other applications. Proxmox VE is a virtualized platform.

The most valuable feature of Proxmox VE is the speed. Additionally, I can modify the solution if needed because it is open-source and the integration of any kind of API and monitoring is hassle-free.

Proxmox VE can improve the management of virtual discs. For example, if my virtual disc is 200 GB and I want to decrease it is not easy. I have to do a lot of things to decrease the size of existing virtual machines. If the Proxmox VE team can make it easy for customers to instantly increase or decrease the virtual machine hard disc, it will be very helpful for me. However, the containers I can do it easily.

I have been using Proxmox VE for approximately seven years.

I rate the stability ofProxmox VE an eight out of ten.

The scalability of Proxmox VE could improve. The vertical scaling needs improvement. If the vertical scaling was better I could input the resources on the fly without shutting down the system. This would make it a lot easier.

We have approximately six technical support staff using this solution in my company. We plan to increase our usage of this solution.

I rate the scalability of Proxmox VE a six out of ten.

I have not had any issues that I would need to contact support about. 

I used Oracle Virtual Box and VMware prior to Proxmox VE. We choose Proxmox VE because of the cost savings, it is free.

Proxmox VE's initial setup of easy. I started the implementation process by selecting a location, installing the hardware and Proxmox VE, and then I made the cluster without the Proxmox VE. The last step was to implement my virtual machine. The full process did not take more than two hours.

I rate the initial setup of Proxmox VE a nine out of ten.

I did the implementation of this solution myself.

This is a free open-source solution.

My advice to others would be to choose simple solutions for only virtual machines with no extra integration of other features. This is an open-source solution and if someone wants to do something on the backend many things could go wrong. It is best to start with something simple, such as virtual machines with containers only. After they have had some experience then they can expand their knowledge with other solutions.

I rate Proxmox VE an eight out of ten.

Proxmox VE is used for many sectors, such as medical, IT, and electronics. It is an open-source server management platform.

The most valuable features of Proxmox VE are the ease of containerization. Overall the solution is generic, feature-rich, and has compatibility.

The documentation in Proxmox VE could improve.

I'm new to this type of solution, there are all these features and options to select in various scenarios, but there's not much documentation out there to explain which option you should be choosing for what, and why. I know there are a lot of YouTube articles, Reddit documentation, and other information where people say if you want to do task A, here's is how, and people follow it blindly. However, nobody understands what they're doing, and why.  I'll tackle any task and develop a solution but I need to understand what I'm doing. I need to understand why I'm selecting certain options, what makes that appropriate, what would make the other option inappropriate, the pros and cons, the whole run-through. I find the documentation lacking.

What I have noticed while I'm running a firewall, FireHOL, which works with DNS, and a media server all runs on my Gen 8 MicroServer. It's an I3350 with 10 gigs of RAM, and I do find that the RAM usage is pretty high. I know I do not have all the RAM allocated to the containers, but I find that the overheads there seem to be pretty high. The high RAM usage comes with input-output latency. I don't seem to have the same problem on the dual Xeon, but again that has infinitesimally more computational power, one would expect that to run quicker.

When it comes to the firewall and other aspects, I'm only looking for a simple solution, low power consumption, good performance at home, to keep my home network on. If the documentation went into a bit more detail on what the overhead requirements of Proxmox VX are and why, and how to optimize, especially when you start bringing in Oracle ZFS and VFS power systems. The RAM usage increases a lot. There's practically nothing about that in the documentation. You have to hunt down the details in VFS, and its functionality elsewhere to figure it out.

On the dual Xeon, for distributed computing, it is running fine. The system is running 24/7 without any problems.

At the moment, one of the limitations is hardware passthrough into containers. To do that, you have to start getting privileged containers. I know there's a lot of hype in the public domain as to the pros and cons of that, and some parts are supported and some are not. It would be interesting to see if technology could develop to the point where we could pass through hardware into containerized applications.

I have been using Proxmox VE for approximately one year.

Proxmox VE is stable and reliable.

Server stability's been phenomenal and I'm running it on several old HP MicroServers. They're Gen 7, using the AMD Turion chips. I've been running it on the Gen 8, I3, 350, and dual CPU E3 in Xeon. there are some performance differences based on what the hardware's capable of, but no matter what platform I run it on there has not ever been any stability problems whatsoever.

The scalability is good. If you're working with generic processor models, it's easy to shift them across different platforms once you place the CPUs.

I have not needed to use the support from Proxmox VE. I have found all the answers I have needed online from user groups and Wiki support pages.

I rate the documentation and community support from Proxmox VE a three out of five.

I have used previously VMware and VirtualBox. Both are installs that have been on Microsoft Windows, and I found them both to be very limiting, very difficult to set up and manage. Proxmox VE, I found to be the easiest to use, quickest in terms of response, and has the best functionality.

The initial setup is very easy. Once you get the hang of it, setting up the VMs, containers, and deploying them is incredibly quick.

The setup for most of the configurations is similar, once you understand the concepts and the principles, it comes down to basics. You know your hardware and what you're setting up, and what it's capable of doing. You can't set up older generation hardware and then expect to have PCI Express Passthrough or GPU Passthrough, because the hardware doesn't support it.

You can't expect the solution to do what the base hardware is not capable of doing. Work within the constraints of the hardware, understand your hardware, and the OS.

You can download the solution and it is an open-source installation, it is exactly the same as their commercial solution.

The maintenance of the solution depends on how you've set it up. If you've only set it up as a functional hypervisor, you have your VMs running, and that's the last thing you did, then you're going to have to come back every two weeks or every month to check on your OS updates, upgrades, and security patches, et cetera. However, you can automate a lot of that with Cron jobs. It's about learning the system which is based on Debian. If you understand Linux and Debian, you will understand how powerful the system is and what you can actually do with it. When you start running things, such as Monits or syslogs, you can automate any error messaging or any problems and it can be sent to your system administrator in an email.

Whether it's a case of regular backups that are happening, if everything is working well, then great, but if one fails, an I/O error or other errors pop up and you get notified of it quickly, then you can fix it easily. If you're only coming in every four weeks to have a look at it and see what's going on, things could have gone horribly wrong.

I would suggest to anybody who's running a hypervisor, is schedule regular backups. Back up your VMs regularly. Schedule it. Automate it, and make sure it happens on a separate machine, onto a separate machine, onto a separate host- because you don't want to lose your VM with all its backups.

If you've taken the time to set it up well with all your Cron jobs and automation, there will be almost zero maintenance.

I rate the implementation of Proxmox VE a five out of five.

To use Proxmox VE there is not a license required. However, you can purchase a support license, which you access, but it doesn't change the functionality of the solution.

Their licensing is very similar to other solutions, such as Canonical and Ubuntu. The full OS is available to you. If you want the support, you will need to pay a license fee.

My advice to others wanting to implement this solution is if you're looking to virtualize, ask yourself why. In terms of bringing your costs and energy consumption down, never mind the whole global eco-footprint hype that everybody wants to get onto. The reality is, for any business, keeping a business afloat is about dollars and cents, and if you can accomplish your IT tasks at a lower cost and expense, have better utilization of hardware, you've probably already hacked a path to what way to move forward.

Instead of spending hundreds of thousands on multiple servers, to then have a less than 5% utilization on each machine, while they using up 500, 600 watts of power, is not efficient. With virtualization, you're running multiple VMs on one physical piece of hardware. You get much better utilization out of it, you're getting much more for the money you are paying, and without any significant drop in performance.

When one considers the internal networking on the VM, where you have different VMs and your containers are running on internal networks. You're not limited to gigabits or 10-gigabits throughputs. It runs on the PCI Express speeds on the board, it is a lot quicker.

I rate Proxmox VE an eight out of ten.

At the moment, it's used for the virtualization of everything within my test environment.

I'm not using the newest version of Proxmox.

It brings all those benefits that virtualization brings. It reduces cost. I don't have to invest so much in buying many servers. I can go buy one new server with enough resources, and I can virtualize using that server. I can also layer features, such as routing, firewall, HTTP, and VLANs, on top of that.

In addition to the virtualization, the firewall and the routing functions that it provides are valuable.

Its user interface can be improved. In the version that I am using, not all functions can be performed by using the UI. There can be some improvement on that. I'm assuming that it has already been improved in the latest version.

I have been using this solution for the past three years or so.

It has been absolutely wonderful in terms of reliability and performance.

I see the options for scalability, but for my own use case, I don't have the need to have several instances. It is just for my test environment, but the options that they provide sound interesting. There are some high availability configurations for multiple Proxmox instances.

My environment has about 30 users. It is being used every day. It is an operational tool because the environment has to be up.

The way the licensing is structured is that you have to pay for the support. My use case is just for my test environment. I have not deployed it on production, so I've not had any need for technical support.

I've worked in environments where other solutions, such as VMware, have been used, but personally, I have not used any other solution. This is the first solution I am using as far as virtualization is concerned.

For me, it was straightforward. There are different user levels for things like this, but it was straightforward for me. It takes about a day or two.

I implemented it myself. For its deployment and maintenance, you need a minimum of one and a maximum of two people. The second person is for backup reasons when the primary resource is not available.

I have absolutely seen an ROI. I am not able to measure the actual value in terms of returns, but because I've invested nothing, apart from the cost of the server or the hypervisor upon which the Proxmox is installed, the value that we've got from it has been huge.

The way the licensing of Proxmox is structured, you can use it for free. It is an open-source solution, and you can use it for free, but if you do need support, then you have to pay for the support. So, you can use it in a way that you don't have to pay anything, which is a plus point for me. For people or users who have huge and more intense use cases, the advice or the recommendation is to always pay for support. In case something goes wrong, you can fall back on the team that will attend to your request. For me, at the moment, the cost is zero.

I would advise that you weigh your use cases very well before deciding whether to use Proxmox or not. It meets the needs of my use case, and I don't have any reason to complain. If there is a switch or change in my use case, I might decide to not use Proxmox. I might consider some other solution.

If you want to run Proxmox without paying for support, like any open-source solution, you have to read the documentation and be familiar with all the dependencies and requirements for your environment. Once you have all of that covered, you are good.

I would rate it a nine out of 10.

Our primary use case for Proxmox VE is for virtualization and a little bit of SaaS storage, basically for virtual machines.

Proxmox VE is simple to use and it is feature rich. The fact is that it performs,

The only issue I have with Proxmox VE is updating it. You have to manually update it or you have to have a way to update it automatically.

The main area for improvement is with the automatic updates, if it's even possible, even if you have to pay for the cloud services. Updates are very important.

If they could fine tune the updating process that would be good.

I have been using Proxmox VE for two years.

Proxmox VE is stable. We have a few issues where all of a sudden you can't update it, because maybe you have taken too long to update the repository. This is a concern for us. Like I mentioned before, the updating feature is very important to us because there could be some security issues.

There are a lot of actions that you need to do with commands, which have not been automated yet. I believe that with time it will be automated.

In terms of scalability, we didn't have any need for scaling because just the fact that you can put them in a cluster and manage one unit is a very good feature. I don't have to manage it individually, I can just put them together in a cluster and manage them for one single piece. I'm about to test the backup feature and also maybe upgrade it to the next version, which is 7.0. I'm expecting that there will be a lot of improvement.

Right now we have about six users on a project that I'm deploying. I'm still managing the project, but due to COVID it has gone on for two years, but we're just about to hand it over. Because of the COVID issue, nobody wants to come to one place to sit down and do anything. All of last year was just wasted, but this year we're able to do a number of things with them. The manual process of updating one by one is relatively stable. In the account, you have to centralize the management. You have to log in one by one and you can have a different password for for each one, it's not unified. They have not unified the authorization process.

One thing I have noticed is that because I put a password on one it is expecting me to manually put a password on the other node. I would expect that for better management you can have the same propagating password. Maybe there's a better way to do it, but that's what I have been seeing and I found that I have to be doing this for each one on each node. That is an issue, but so far it's been very good. It's been very stable. I never had any issues with it. It's cool stuff.

I  really like the software storage. I used it on one of the cloud servers that we set up and it's working very well.

We do plan to increase the usage in the future.

Proxmox VE is very simple to use.

The deployment took a long time, but it was not because of Proxmox. It was some other issues for other projects. Installing the Proxmox software is very easy. It just takes a day or two.

We did it in-house.

Our license is on a yearly basis.

There are no other costs, just the license fee and the license is flexible. You could decide to go subscription only or you could decide to pay for support.

My advice to anyone considering Proxmox VE is that they should study it to understand it, because it is feature reach, so you have to read the manuals. They have to read the manual and unfortunately the manual training level is on the high side, so for people who are experimenting or who are just coming into the free version, it might be a little bit hard for them. Proxmox should try and market more on the training side so users can speed it up and have a good adoption. I hear that people understand the product very well, because right now I don't think it has a rival. It's trying to beat the Oracle VM or the other VMs in the market.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Proxmox VE a seven.

With Proxmox, we use the hypervisor of Proxmox and Proxmox backups. In VMware, I see all the production, like vSphere, vCenter, vRealize Operations Manager, vSAN, Workspace ONE, and VMware Horizon. Right now we are working with NSX. 

For VMware, as a partner, I have many cases of vSAN as a hyperconvergence solution. This solution is very popular in my country, mostly with banks. There are many solutions that we have implemented and that are very successful. Horizon is another solution that is highly requested by clients. Because of the pandemic, the VDI and Remote Desktop are often requested from our clients. Those two are very good solutions. From my experience, I don't have many problems with them.

Proxmox is free, very stable, and doesn't require more resources for memory RAM. It's fine for a small data center.

One issue with Proxmox is that some processes are not automatic. For some processes, you have to do it manually by command line. I don't know about the last version of Proxmox, but I had that problem with this version.

I've been using this solution for one year. In my last job I was a final client, so I worked with vSphere and the vCenter. I did a migration from vSphere to Proxmox, and I was in charge of this infrastructure using Proxmox. I am working for a partner of the VMware product as a presale VMware specialist.

Most implementations are on-premise. We really don't have implementation on cloud. I'm from Bolivia, and we recently have been introducing on-cloud solutions, but most of the solutions are on-premises.

Proxmox is very stable.

For deployment, we used eight blade servers.

Proxmox is is free.

I've worked with VMware, vSphere, vCenter, and vRealize Operations Manager. VSphere works perfectly. The enterprise version is very complete, and you get almost everything you need in data center.

I would rate Proxmox VE 7 out of 10.

We use the solution to host virtual machines, such as: SQL Server Database, Active directory domain services, web services, general cloud applications, and some virtual machines or containers for development and testing purpose. Specially the preference for containers is due to the easly development when the only basic operational system is required istead of fully hardware virtualization (kvm).

We heavly use replication resource to assign some garantine to critical virtual machines wich could run eventually on other sites or hosts, in case of broken internet links, hardware issues or even hacker attacks (many thanks to ZFS working with PVE-ZSync feature that allow planning a standback period of retention snapshots, quickly failover and fallback of virtual machine storage)

It is high availability resources, replication and live-migration (on cluster envirioment). We don't have significant problems with hardware issue or maintenance schedule, because with ZFS, Cephs or other shared storage incorporated in Proxmox technology, it´s possible to migrate virtual machines to other hosts with almost zero downtime.

1) The two-factor authentication: for security reasons!

2) PVE-Zsync: wich allows replication outside clusters, with snapshot retention for quickly failover and failback (by incremental syncs)

3) Large documentation and "How-To" on the wiki page;

4) Many usefull integration: APIs, Active Directory;

5) ACLS, Groups e User Managment: Allows to set and customize permissions.

6) Proxmox Backup Server: Assertive Incrememtal Backup Solution for realible local backups or remote with encryption support! That's perfect.

7) Built on Debian based Kernel, very stable distro

1) PVE-Zsync GUI implementation - This is a very important tool, it could delivery the more advantage in comparision to Xen Orchestra and Microsoft Virtual Machine Replica Service.

2) Central Cluster Administration: The possibility to manage many clusters sites in "one only page" instead of oppening many browsers tabs! IT Cloud companies as us, usually need to access diferent clusters sites, I think it's good idea to centralize the administration GUI for companies that own two or more cluster sites!

3) In connection with my suggestion number 2, the possibility to create a "farm cluster". In few words, the possibility to move virtual machines (live or not) among diferents clusters sites separated by WAN links. Actually, PVE Cluster is realible on local links, due to multicast or udp rings, but in some scenarios when a entire cluster site needs to be put offline (eg, for maintenance or internet issues), a virtua machine migration to other cluster that belongs to the same "farm" but in other region will increase the "value" of Proxmox simular to Microsoft Azure Site Recovery ou Amazon. That will make my evaluation increase from 8 to 9 or even 10!

Since 2014

The technical support is the very complete. I don't  have a subscription, because the support that we need for our applications and solution are available on the Proxmox Wiki However, for big companies we recomend the Proxmox subscription for getting a first class support and best pratices.

Microsoft Hyper-V on situation thats requires Outside Migration (see my comment 3 on the question: what areas could the product or service be improved)

The solution is very easy to set up and implement. It's not complex. We can put a single host or even a Cluster only line in less than one hour! 

Not yet!

Proxmox delivery more cost X Benefits in comparision to VMWare and Citrix Xen. It could be improved in future for more benefits in comparison to XCP-NG and  Microsoft Hyper-V

Citrix Xen-Server and XCP-NG

We use this solution as our virtualization platform. It is a hypervisor that we use for our virtual needs to run servers.  

One of the things that I found most valuable is how easy Proxmox is to deploy. It can run on anything. Right now we are running it on some file servers that we have without any special configuration.  

I also like how it has got the same high-availability features as you get in a product like VMware. I get those benefits and I do not have to pay the $17,000 a year for the VMware license to enjoy them.  

Because Proxmox VE is open-source, the only expense we have is the support costs. You get an easy to use GUI that you can use to look to see who your virtual clients are and what hosts they are living on. You can also essentially vMotion — which is a VMware term but the feature in Proxmox does the same thing — to transfer a system.  

It is host-aware, so if the host Proxmox is living on crashes and there is another host in the cluster, it will automatically failover. That is just a great capability. It also can do the same thing if performance on the given host exceeds a certain threshold. You have the option to configure that as you want it with the product. It will automatically move to a different host to improve performance with the system and, in turn, improve the performance of the application running on it.  

Really every user interface could use a little bit of improvement. It is already very user-friendly at the present time but there are some ways that it can get even better.  

Another area that might have room for improvement is either building in or having third-party tools that could report on CPU and memory usage across your virtual platform. They have those tools for VMware and that helps you to point out resource bottlenecks so that you can right-size a VM. If a VM is soaking up too many resources, it is defeating the purpose of virtualization. Proximo is really missing those kinds of tools right now. You have to do that on your own. So that could definitely be an opportunity for improvement. It is not necessarily just room for Proxmox to grow, it is more of a possibility industry-wide for these products.  

I have been using Poxmox VE (Virtual Environment) for the last 12 months.  

The stability of Proxmox is good. It runs well, and they are constantly looking to improve the product. By "they" I mean the core group at Proxmox themselves. But the key part of the updates is everything is well-tested and the goal is obviously to maintain stability while upgrading the functionality.  

Proxmox is scalable. Let's say you wanted to add an additional host, or you wanted to add additional hosts just from memory or virtual CPUs, just for additional resources. You could just add a host. You do not need to buy a license to do it. That is better than just scalability, it is scalability without cost.  

With VMware, you have to buy a license or you need to use it free for 30 days, but eventually, you are going to have to procure another license. With this product, I can just take whatever server I have, install Proxmox on it, and that is it. I introduce it to the cluster during the install, and everything is up and running.  

So it is very, very easy to scale at will. I have not seen any limitations of the product itself that would prevent me from adding additional systems or or other resource into a cluster. By resources, I mean CPU, memory, drive space, or other performance enhancement.  

We do not even have to have anybody on staff who is here to maintain the system. It is just another part of the existing architecture that gets monitored by the systems that we already have in place. We have monitoring set up so that we can tell how the system is performing overall. We can generate reports within Proxmox to tell us how it is performing in a given cluster and how many hosts it has.  

We plan on keeping it as our virtual platform and we are pretty confident that it can scale with our needs. If our virtual needs increase, then that is exactly what we would do: scale it up. We can just run everything on it — anything not critical that is fine running on a VM. Right now, we are a very small company. There is plenty of room to grow and I do not expect Proxmox will be exhibiting pushback any time soon.  

Customer support is the only cost for the product and it is about $3,000 maximum. It depends on the support plan you choose. There are two different plans. If you want a 24 by seven plan or next business day, that is the difference. The plans are a little different but it is all very clearly laid out on their website.  

Their support is pretty good. Even if you did not want to pay support, the thing that is great about the product is that it is open-source. There are a lot of knowledgeable users nowadays and the pool is growing all the time. A lot of times you can just Google whatever issue you are having and likely come up with the solution to the problem.  

We did use a different solution prior to Proxmox VE, and that would be VMware. At this point, we have been able to migrate from VMware completely and we just use Proxmox.  

Before I got here, the company was strictly using VMware for this type of solution. I am not really sure if they looked at other solutions. When I got here I did not even know about Proxmox. I just assumed we were a VMware shop. But after I started, someone had discovered Proxmox and I started reading up on it. It was interesting enough that I started using it. As I did, I thought it felt very familiar. I kept testing and as far as I was concerned I could do everything in Proxmox VE that I was doing in VMware.  

The initial deployment of Proxmox did not really have all of the same features as VMware, but that was kind of the expected in a newer open-source product. They added the other features very quickly. How much the product is advancing is especially apparent with this latest release where it has got the same failover concerns as VMware does. They are called "high-availability" features.  

So now that you can get all the HA (high-availability) features that VMware has, there are not too many major differences between VMware and Proxmox. The only difference is you get it for no cost. It is easy to use, easy to manage, easy to scale, and there are probably going to be a whole lot more and better things coming down the pipe from them. It really has been a great effort on the part of the developers.  

The question of whether it is easy to set up or not really is more like five questions. They are pretty easy questions.  

We have the source on a thumb drive. You launch the system install from the thumb drive and the first question it wants answered are "What is the time zone," "What is the host hostname," and "What is the IP address?" There are three of the questions. With those three questions, you just started the installation on the target server.  

If you want to get running, there are two more important questions. You answer these questions the installer does its job and installs everything you need on your end and you are done. The two questions are "What is your username?" and "What is your password?" You answer those questions and you are done with the installation. You can see it has a high-level of difficulty.  

From the time the setup starts, the total time it takes to deploy everything is about 20 minutes. You do not need an integrator, reseller, or consultant to help you out with the installation. You can set up everything yourself.  

My advice on the pricing is that there is no pricing: it is free. The only thing you pay for is support and it is like $2,500 a year. The support is completely optional. But even the support is absolutely affordable for just about any company in the market. In any case, it is well below the cost of a VMware license.  

My advice to people considering the product is that they have nothing to lose. Run it in a development lab, make sure they are comfortable with it, and make sure that the application that their company runs can support that hypervisor. It should. Then deploy Proxmox and start saving money.  

I have been encouraging former colleagues of mine that are VMware users to start using Proxmox. I suggest they throw it in their development lab and spin it up and start building systems just so they can see the absolute benefits of this product and really enjoy the fact that they can have it as a solution at no cost.  

Proxmox is constantly coming out with updates. If the company you are working for has the appetite to run updates frequently in a production environment you can enjoy frequent releases. They are always looking to add additional features to the product. That is kind of nice. They have a very agile approach to the development of the application itself.  

What people are concerned about is that it is open source. But hopefully, they will start to realize all you have got to do is use the product, they do not have to program anything. It has got the same features that VMware has, but it is not as restrictive as VMware because it is open-source and you can actually build on it if you want to.  

In VMware, the hypervisor, which is called VirtualCenter, needs to live on its own system. It can not coexist with everything else. Proxmox does not have that issue. Proxmox can have everything living on one system. You will want more than one piece of hardware in a given cluster so you can set it up separately if you want to, but the possibility is there to put it all on one box. I think it is a little bit better than VMware in that sense because you have that flexibility.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is best, I would rate Proxmox VE as a seven-out-of-ten. Ironically, I would rate VMware lower than Proxmox because of the price.