i need to build a 2 server cluster to host a frontend virtual machine.

the virtual machine should run on 1 node(most powerful) and in case of hardware/software failure run on 2 node (less powerful only for services availability, reliability)

should i use vmware or hyper-v for best costs/Reliability ratio?

thanks in advance.

As reliability go I would say VMware can beat hyper-V at any time, specially they have been out there for a lot longer & running in many production environment. I know many members of our team will argue on this, but if you come to me I would always implement VMware over Hyper-V when a critical application is involved.

In regards of cost, it will all depend. If you are going to need centeralized management & all the advanced featured VMware offers, then for sure your upfront cost will be higher than hyper-V. Though something to consider is that you are paying for many features, that Microsoft Hyper-V still failing to offer. You will be paying as well for the extra reliability that you will be getting as well. Please note if you start calculating the management suites of Microsoft Hyper-V & VMware & hardware required and distribute that money on the number of virtual machines you can run on both setups, then your cost per virtual machine will come very close.

If you are looking only for the ability to run multiple VMs reliabily on a hyper-visor & you will use Microsoft clustering & Microsoft NLB over it to protect your virtual machines then definetly VMware ESXi will be a cheaper and more reliable option.

Please note this is my individual thought and experience of the two products & not every one in the team here will agree with it. A good comparison of VMware VI3.5 & Hyper-V can be found as well at:

MS HyperV vs VMware ESX

MS HyperV vs VMware ESXi