Vmware vs Hyper-V Advice needed

I need to convince my boss why Vmware is better than Microsofts HyperV so that we can impliment a Vmware Vsphere Solution.
I have about 80 servers and non of them have any fault tolerance etc.
In my opinion Vmware is much better. I have set it up in my test environment. Got HA and Vmotion working and its really an awsome product and my favorite on the market.

If I am to get a atleast 2 really strong servers with a entry level SAN , so that I can atleast consolidate around 10-20 servers on it , I will need to do a proper cost analysis and really prove to him why we should go Vmware and not HyperV.
Cost implications is obviously the biggest factor and I should also be able to show and motivate the difference in features , and whether its worth it for the company to invest in a virtual solution.
At this point everyone is against virtualisation but Im not because I have used it before in my previous job aswell.

I need the difference in licensing costs, what Vmware has that Hyper V does not. If windows licences is cheaper if it is virtual.
I would also like some recommendations for a good entry level 2 blade sever with SAN solution. Something that if proven it works effeciently can easily be expanded to accomadate exapansion.

Thank you for all your input and advice
Who is Participating?

[Product update] Infrastructure Analysis Tool is now available with Business Accounts.Learn More

I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

Start here - this topic has been discussed many time :)

Have a look at this too.

eugene20022002Author Commented:
What about entry level physical servers recomendations?

All i need to start off with is 2 servers with a san that is fully vmware compatible so that I can atleast run HA on it.
So that I can get some quotes on it.
Determine the Perfect Price for Your IT Services

Do you wonder if your IT business is truly profitable or if you should raise your prices? Learn how to calculate your overhead burden with our free interactive tool and use it to determine the right price for your IT services. Download your free eBook now!

vmwarun - ArunCommented:
Dell PowerVault MD3000i would be a good candidate for iSCSI SAN.
I suggest that you make an inventory of all your physical servers and then categorize them accordingly (Domain Controllers, Web Servers, DB Servers,etc) which could give you a picture about the number of physical instances which you can save.
Also keep a note of your OEM Licenses since they cannot be migrated to the Virtual Environment.
You can do a P2V of your physical machines only when they have a Retail or Volume License.
eugene20022002Author Commented:
Thanks arunjaju.
Also do you pay cheaper for your windows licenses if its virtualized?
For hardware-suggestions: look at the HP BladeSystem blades: you can start with a c3000-enclosure. When you're using so-called half-height blades (like the BL460c), you can start with 2 blades and expand up to eight. For storage: there are storage-blades available to put in your c3000, or you can take a look at the HP MSA series (Modular Smart Array).

For arguement-suggestions: I'd suggest you make a list of requirements first, and then tick off what can and can't be done with Hyper-V or VMWare. The result will be your hypervisor of choice. Now you're trying to work the other way around: first choosing a product and then trying to find reasons to use the extra features...
vmwarun - ArunCommented:
Hi eugene20022002,

I can't speak to all the differences between Hyper-V and VMWare, but I can tell you that Microsoft is making strong gains with it. It is not a product to be scared of. Citrix XenServer and Hyper-V are the same core product so that tell you something right there. What I can tell you is there are a few main differences that I know of.

The biggest difference in my mind is the driver model that Hyper-V uses. Hyper-V uses a shared driver model and VMWare doesn't. To me that means greater potential to negatively impact all VM's on the host. I would imagine it's also a contention point for resources. Another difference is Hyper-V requires more hardware resources to run the same number of VM's than VMWare. You had mentioned you have 80 physical servers. With VMWare, because it has far superior memory management capabilities you may be able to utilize less hosts, which would equate to huge savings. I say may, because CPU utilization plays a significant factor in this.  Ultimately, you're biggest argument I think is Microsoft is still learning about virtualization where as VMWare has been the leader in Virtualization for the last 10 years. With that said I'm a VCP so I'm always going to come down on the side of VMWare, but lets face it cost is always a concern and VMWare isn't cheap.

You asked the question is it cost effective to virtualize and the simple answer is YES. However, the more accurate answer is it depends. Not all servers can be virtualized, but the majority of them can be. It just depends on the applications running on that server and how they handle resource utilization.

I've listed a basic setup below that I'm sure will work for you to get you in the door. The great thing about it is that its very scalable, and is leveraged around lower cost technologies. You could cheapen it up even more and use something like the Dell MD3000i stated above, but I would strongly advise against it. It would not have anywhere near the capability to achieve the I/O you're going to need.

- Dell Equallogic PS4000XV (x16 600GB 15k RPM SAS drives 9.6TB total disk space)
- x2 Dell R710 - Xeon 5540, 64GB RAM, x4 146GB SAS drives RAID10
- x2 HP3500yl 24port switches (needed for ISCSi back-end)
- x2 VMWare VSphere Advanced (cheaper because it does not contain DRS)

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
eugene20022002Author Commented:
@oztrodamus:  Thank you so much for your input. That is exactly the type of input Im looking for in order to build my business case.
I think the motivation to go virtual may not be that difficult once I present them with facts and a show them the savings over time , example less racks , less power , less aircons , less physical servers. HA , Vmotion , easy of deploying new servers.
I know initial cost is going to be a bit much but hopefully I can show a saving with added benifits.
Is there an intel and HP alternative for your HW recomendations?
Im going to get quotes for the Dell Solution now but need more than one quote.
Thanks again for all your resonses.

Another question, do you save on Windows licenses if it is a VM compared to a physical server?
For HP/Intel alternatives:
- Dell Equallogic PS4000XV (x16 600GB 15k RPM SAS drives 9.6TB total disk space) => Look at the HP Modular Smart Arrays, the older MSA2324i, 2312i, or the new P2000-series.
- x2 Dell R710 - Xeon 5540, 64GB RAM, x4 146GB SAS drives RAID10 => Look at the HP Proliant DL380 G6 series

And yes, you can save on Windows-licenses, check the link arunraju gave, I can't explain it better :)
Honestly, I do prefer HP servers over Dell servers, BUT hands down Equallogic is the best ISCSi SAN on the market today. You will not find a that better SAN that offers a cheaper price per performance. The only downside is a couple years ago Dell bought Equallogic and now in order to get the discounts that make it a cost competitive solution you need to buy Dell servers. With that said the Dell R710 is a very good server and supports up to 144GB RAM. The closest HP alternative is the DL380 line as mentioned above.
Regarding Windows licensing "cheaper" is a matter of perspective. It's certainly easier to buy Windows Enterprise licenses, because you get 4 virtual licenses and 1 physical (If you use VMWare the physical license won't count, because it's intended for your Hyper-V installtion). I don't think it's really any cheaper though when you breakdown the actual cost per license. The advantage is when you couple it with Microsoft Assurance you ammoritize the payment out over three years.
eugene20022002Author Commented:
Hmmm that is what my next question was going to be. Whether you only save if the Virtual solution is MS or if it doesnt matter whether its vmware , citrix , xen or hyper v.
eugene20022002Author Commented:
The licensing got me a bit confused. Im not sure what I need.
I think I need :
1 x VSphere Vcenter 4 license
2 x Vsphere Advanced Server ESX licenses.
Is this correct?
Also Im really getting confused when it comes to per core or per cpu. Can anyone just clear that for me?
x4 VMWare VSphere Advanced licenses is all you would need. The VCentre Server license would be included along with VMotion, HA, and VCB.

VMWare licenses by the physical CPU package not the number of cores. With a limitation of 6 cores per package.
vmwarun - ArunCommented:
vSphere Advanced and Enterprise Plus supports upto 12 Cores per CPU while the rest of them support 6 Cores per CPU.
eugene20022002Author Commented:
Awsome guys, Thanks for your assistance.
vmwarun - ArunCommented:
I also suggest that you go for Enterprise License rather than Advanced License since DRS would be useful to you when you have Server Proliferation at a later date.
DRS is nice to have, but it's not necessary, and you can always add it later via a license upgrade in a year or two. The main thing is getting off the ground by keeping costs under control.
eugene20022002Author Commented:
@otrodamus  -  I agree with you. At the moment its much more important to keep costs at an absolute minimum otherwise I run the risk of it not being approved in the first place. So I just need to get it started so that they can then see the awsome power of Vmware :-)
eugene20022002Author Commented:
One of the questions Ive been asked most is , What happens if the SAN fails?
Ive explained features such as HA for example that allows a host to fail and the machines just being restarted on the remaining host.  However Im not expert yet and nto sure how I can answer that question without showing that the SAN is a single point of failure. So how can I answer that question without my audience turning their back on vmware?
i know usually it will just be a drive that will go faulty and thats obviously easy to fix. and the chances of the whole SAN failing is really really small, but not impossible so I do need to plan for worst case scenario.
In general a SAN array is pretty redundant by design. Almost every aspect of the array has a redundant part. But you are right it's not impossible for a SAN to fail. It's just not very likely. if you really need to mitigate the possibility of failure you would need to have two SAN's in some type of replication cluster. But that's really taking things to the Nth degree. The problem you're most likely going to run into is hard drive failure and you can mitigate that risk by the RAID type you choose.
eugene20022002Author Commented:
@ oztrodamus - I agree , I just need to be prepared when faced with these questions so that I have can have a good factual response. I suppose having a good SLA HW maintainance on it would help aswell. Like a 2 hr response 4hr fix etc. So even if it does fail it will be resolved in a relatively quick time.
eugene20022002Author Commented:
To all you guys. Thank you for your input and advice..
My question have been answered.
Thanks again.
eugene20022002Author Commented:
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Microsoft Virtual Server

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.