Link to home
Create AccountLog in
Avatar of bluey80
bluey80

asked on

The cost virtualizing resource intensive servers

Hi All,

we have been having a discussion at my office about if there a point when it is cheaper for a machine to be physical rather than virtual?. Because if it requires a large number of CPU cores and/or a large amount of memory, it works to reduce the maximum number of machines that the host can support potentially destroying the overall cost effectiveness.

Is there a "sweet spot" for CPU or RAM requirements that dictate a machine should be physical not virtual. What is it? How is it derived?

Is there a design rule or method, based on worked and priced out examples that enable us to figure out if we should choose to have a Physical Machine instead of a Virtual Machine?

thanks
SOLUTION
Avatar of Duncan Meyers
Duncan Meyers
Flag of Australia image

Link to home
membership
Create a free account to see this answer
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
See answer
Avatar of bluey80
bluey80

ASKER

Thanks that's helpful. Is there a ratio of how many guests per host it takes to become cost effective?. E.g. If I have 2 servers that require 64Gb RAM and 4 x CPU's each and a host can only accomodate 2 servers based on those requirements, is it still cost effective to go virtual?
SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
Create a free account to see this answer
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
Create a free account to see this answer
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.