Evaluating VergeOS: A Practical, Balanced Look From Hands-On Testing

David Vincent

David Vincent

— 3 min read

With everything shifting in the virtualization landscape, I wanted to take some time to evaluate platforms outside the standard VMware and Proxmox choices. VergeOS has been on my list for a a little bit, and even without a dedicated homelab licensing tier, I had a legitimate work-related need to test it — so I signed up with my work email and began a proper hands-on evaluation.

This post isn’t meant to sell anything or position one platform over another.
It’s simply a field report: here’s the hardware I used, the workloads I deployed, what worked well, what didn’t, and where VergeOS currently fits from my perspective.

Environment Setup

The hardware I used was straightforward and representative of what you’d find in many smaller enterprise clusters or edge deployments:

  • HP Z440 Workstation
  • Intel E5-2680 v4 (14 cores)
  • 256GB RAM
  • Intel 2TB PCIe SSD
  • Mellanox ConnectX-5 Dual-Port 10Gb SFP+ NIC
  • Flat LAN (192.168.1.x) — no VLANs, overlays, or extra complexity

This evaluation was done using a single host, so features like migration, HA, and multi-node behavior were intentionally out of scope for this article. Those will be covered in a later write-up.

The goal here was simple: evaluate VergeOS as a potential fit for work, and diversify beyond my existing VMware and Proxmox setups.

Installation Experience

Booting the VergeOS ISO was uneventful — which is exactly what you want. The system came up cleanly, allowed me to assign a static IP address, pick the SSD as Tier 1 storage, and move directly through installation.

Once finished, the web interface was available both locally on the host and remotely using the same UI. No installer gymnastics, no additional virtual appliances, and no multi-stage setup routines. It was direct, simple, and quick.

First Impressions

Two things stood out immediately:

  1. The UI is very responsive.
  2. The navigation model is different but consistent.

VergeOS nests settings under first-class objects — VMs, Networks, Tenants, Storage — rather than separate global settings menus. If you're used to VMware’s vCenter structure, this takes a moment to adjust to, but once you understand the layout, it makes sense.

Workload Deployment

I deployed multiple Windows Server 2022 and Windows Server 2025 VMs without issue. Performance was stable and as expected.

For Linux VMs, I encountered a small adjustment related to the recipe (VergeOS’s template concept). The recipe I used defaulted the console to serial, so after creating the VM, I switched it to VNC for proper graphical console access. This was a template default — not a platform limitation — and once changed, everything worked smoothly.

Overall, workload deployment was straightforward and reliable.

Networking Observations

My testing environment is very simple: a flat network with no VLANs or segmentation. This made it a good baseline for evaluating how VergeOS behaves without extra infrastructure.

  • Getting VMs onto an External Network (the main LAN) was immediate.
  • Setting up Internal Networks using VergeOS’s SDN features was just as easy.
  • DHCP and routing behaved exactly as expected.

The main standout was how simple this was compared to setting up NSX in the past. I’ve had nights where getting NSX deployed and giving a VM basic outbound access felt like a full project of its own. VergeOS required none of that — the networking experience was clean and straightforward.

Storage Behavior (VergeFS)

The 2TB Intel PCIe SSD I used is an enterprise pull, and VergeOS had no issues with it. VergeFS performed very well — exactly what I would expect from enterprise-grade flash storage in a workstation chassis.

Snapshotting, cloning, and general I/O behavior felt normal and responsive. There was nothing unusual or concerning about storage performance or reliability during testing.

Day-to-Day Operations

Daily use was stable and predictable:

  • VM console access was reliable and entirely browser-based — no need for VMRC or any external console tools.
  • Starting, stopping, and rebooting VMs was quick and consistent.
  • Occasionally I refreshed the UI faster than the platform’s status polling updated — more about my own impatience than anything else.
  • The unified interface for compute, storage, and networking reduced the usual context switching.

Overall, day-to-day operations were smooth, with no significant friction.

Limitations Noted

Coming from VMware’s mature ecosystem, one area where the difference shows is automation tooling.

VergeOS does have an API, and it works well. The platform also supports recipes, Terraform, and integration points. However — and this is important — I am coming into the VergeOS API fresh, so some of what I initially interpret as “maturity gaps” could very well be my own learning curve rather than a limitation of the platform itself.

VMware’s automation stack is the result of decades of refinement, widely adopted tools, and a massive ecosystem. VergeOS is earlier in that lifecycle, but the foundation that’s already there is solid and thoughtfully implemented.

Overall Takeaway

The strongest part of VergeOS is the integrated design:

  • Hypervisor
  • Storage
  • Networking
  • Tenancy
  • Automation layer

—all included in one platform, without requiring additional licenses or external components.

VMware’s VCF 9 consolidates much of the VMware stack, but it comes with significant cost and complexity. VergeOS takes a different approach: a unified system that prioritizes simplicity, consistency, and maintainability.

It doesn’t aim to replicate every advanced VMware feature. Instead, it delivers a cohesive and capable virtualization platform that handles the fundamentals extremely well. For environments where operational simplicity matters as much as feature density, VergeOS presents a strong, well-rounded option.

Read more