Hyper-V on Core or Full GUI?

Hello Experts,

I have been using Hyper-V on Server 2008 R2 Core just fine. However, sometimes I feel that it can be confusing to navigate/troubleshoot. Basically, I would like some real-world opinions on whether it's better, in the long-run, to have Hyper-V on Core or the standard GUI. I orignally put it on Core to reduce the OS footprint and free up resources for the Guest Machines that would be built.

Who is Participating?
JoltinJoeConnect With a Mentor Commented:
On the kinds of servers typically running several virtual machines, resources are typically plentiful enough that I find the performance gain of core over the full GUI to be negligible.  I suppose core sort of forces the fact that less junk can be installed by admins and bog the server down, but good server management can counter that easily enough.
Rob WilliamsConnect With a Mentor Commented:
I agree, nothing wrong with using core, but if you look at the size of the install, and monitor the resources used by both core and GUI versions there is very little difference. Of course you can download Hyper-V server 2008 for free where as GUI you have to have a Server 2008 license, which is one significant advantage.
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.