XCP-ng vs Proxmox. Which virtualisation solution is right for you?

Virtualisation lets multiple virtual machines or containers share the same physical hardware, saving resources and increasing flexibility. A look at XCP-ng and Proxmox reveals two distinct approaches to virtualisation, each with its own advantages depending on how it’s used.

What is Proxmox?

Proxmox Virtual Environment (Proxmox VE) is a Debian-based open-source virtualisation platform. It combines the KVM hypervisor for fully virtualised virtual machines with LXC containers for lightweight workloads. Proxmox includes a web-based management interface, built-in clustering and high-availability features, and support for a variety of storage systems. It also provides a dedicated backup solution and several administrative tools.

What is XCP-ng?

XCP-ng (Xen Cloud Platform – next generation) is a free, community-developed platform of the Xen hypervisor created as an open fork of Citrix XenServer. It’s a bare-metal (Type 1) hypervisor that uses the xAPI interface for management and Open vSwitch for networking. Xen Orchestra is commonly used for web-based management and backup tasks. XCP-ng is fully open source and actively maintained by a large community.

What are the main differences between XCP-ng vs Proxmox?

While both XCP-ng and Proxmox are powerful platforms, they differ in architecture, functionality, and how they’re operated.

Architecture and hypervisor

Proxmox VE is built on KVM and QEMU, which are integrated into the Linux kernel and benefit from strong community support. This makes Proxmox flexible and naturally compatible with modern Linux technologies. XCP-ng, on the other hand, is based on the Xen hypervisor – a Type 1 hypervisor that sits as a separate layer between hardware and virtual machines. These architectural differences affect driver integration, security and whether virtual machines are paravirtualised or fully virtualised.

Management and operation

One major difference between Proxmox and XCP-ng is how they’re managed. Proxmox includes a ready-to-use web GUI for centralised management of clusters, storage, backups and virtual machine consoles. XCP-ng offers the XAPI interface and basic command-line tools, but most users add Xen Orchestra for a more advanced web interface. Xen Orchestra brings together VM management, monitoring, backup, and replication in one dashboard, simplifying cluster administration.

Container support

Proxmox offers native support for LXC containers, which lets lightweight containers run alongside virtual machines with minimal overhead. XCP-ng, in comparison, focuses on virtual machines. Containers must be hosted within a VM, which adds some setup and resource requirements.

Storage support

Proxmox is flexible when it comes to storage. It supports traditional options like LVM and iSCSI as well as modern ones like ZFS, which provides snapshots, replication and data integrity verifications via checksums. It also integrates with Ceph, enabling distributed and reliable cluster storage designed for uptime. This variety allows administrators to design storage architectures that are best suited to their needs.

XCP-ng also supports local storage repositories (EXT or LVM) along with NFS and iSCSI, covering most standard setups. Advanced systems such as Ceph or other distributed storage options can be added but require manual setup or community integrations. Out of the box, XCP-ng is simpler but still adaptable with the appropriate expertise.

Backup and disaster recovery

Proxmox includes the Proxmox Backup Server, which provides encrypted, deduplicated and incremental backups built into the platform for straightforward management. XCP-ng typically relies on Xen Orchestra for backups, including snapshots, incremental copies and replication. Third-party tools can also be integrated if needed.

Network and SDN

Networking also differs between the two platforms. Proxmox includes its own software-defined networking (SDN) framework for managing virtual networks across multiple cluster nodes from a single interface. XCP-ng uses Open vSwitch by default, which supports VLANs, bonding and other advanced network features. To achieve SDN-style management, Xen Orchestra is usually added.

Security

Both Proxmox and XCP-ng offer strong security features, though their approaches differ. Proxmox offers role-based permissions, two-factor authentication and a firewall that can operate at both the cluster and VM levels. XCP-ng is built on Xen’s architecture, which offers strong isolation between virtual machines as well as regular security updates. In both cases, administrators should protect management interfaces and apply updates regularly to maintain system security.

Performance and scalability

Both platforms perform well in environments ranging from small labs to large production clusters. Proxmox includes out-of-the-box optimisations for memory-heavy workloads, while XCP-ng often performs best in VM-centric setups that make use of Xen-specific tuning. Actual performance depends heavily on hardware and workload, so testing in your own environment is advised.

Support and licences

In terms of licences, the two platforms are quite similar. Proxmox is free to use and offers optional paid-for subscriptions for professional support and enterprise updates. Without a subscription, all core features remain available, though update management is less streamlined. XCP-ng is fully open source and completely free. For companies that need guaranteed support, optional commercial plans are available from the developers.

Pros and cons of Proxmox vs. XCP-ng

Proxmox is an all-in-one platform that combines virtualisation, containers, storage and backups in one environment. It’s especially appealing for new users and small teams who want to keep setup simple. Its intuitive web interface and straightforward cluster creation reduce complexity, while the built-in backup system streamlines data protection. The trade-off is that Proxmox’s flexibility requires some technical understanding. Knowing how to work with storage systems such as ZFS or Ceph helps you make the most of the platform’s capabilities. Businesses that need access to the enterprise repository will also need a paid subscription.

XCP-ng, meanwhile, performs best when the focus is on virtual machines and Xen’s architecture can be fully utilised – ideal for environments with strict security requirements or existing Xen-based systems. Combined with Xen Orchestra, it becomes a powerful suite for management, monitoring and backups. As a fully open-source, community-driven platform, it attracts a wide range of users. The downside is the lack of native container support – containers must run inside virtual machines, adding a bit of overhead. XCP-ng is therefore best suited for pure VM environments or teams migrating from Citrix XenServer.

Proxmox is a solid choice for small teams, test labs or mixed workloads that combine virtual machines and containers. Its ease of use, native LXC integration and built-in backup tools make it a versatile platform for hybrid environments. XCP-ng, by contrast, is ideal for VM-focused infrastructures that benefit from Xen’s performance or compatibility with existing Xen systems. Both are stable, production-ready platforms – the decision will ultimately depend on your specific requirements.

Overview of alternatives

Beyond Proxmox and XCP-ng, several other well-established virtualisation platforms may also be worth exploring depending on your goals:

• VMware ESXi: A proven enterprise standard for large data centres, offering extensive features and a strong partner ecosystem. However, when comparing Proxmox vs. VMware, it’s clear that VMware’s proprietary licensing model often results in higher costs for enterprise use.
• Microsoft Hyper-V: Built into Windows Server, Hyper-V is ideal for Windows-based infrastructures. Compared to Proxmox, it’s easier to deploy for Windows systems but less flexible in mixed Linux environments.
• Pure KVM: For those seeking maximum control with minimal abstraction, KVM/QEMU is a strong choice. However, when compared against Proxmox, KVN requires more manual setup for clustering, uptime protection and GUI management.