Hyper-V Server 2012 R2 vs Server 2012 R2 with Hyper-V role resource usage

Let me start off by saying that I am a VMware guy, but am currently looking into the Hyper-V based on the new features, abilities, cost savings in the 2012 version.

I have built out two identical HP blade servers one with Hyper-V server 2012 R2 (Base metal install with sconfig.cmd) and one with Server 2012 R2 and the Hyper-V role installed.

I wanted to run these two machines side by side to see the difference in resource utilization between the full server OS with role and just bare metal hyper-v install. After getting both of the servers built I was pretty surprised to find that there really isnt much difference between the two.

The full server 2012 install took up about 13gb worth of disk space and at idle the server sits right around 1.2 gb of used memory.

The hyper-v r2 server install took up about 8.5 gb worth of disk space and at ide the server is using 2gb of memory.

Now call me crazy but I dont see why a slimmed down bare metal install of Hyper-V should use more memory than the full server OS. Am I missing something here because with the numbers that I am seeing there is really no resource benefit to go to Hyper-V server 2012  R2?

I was thinking this was going to be comparable to an Esxi install where the resource for the hypervisor was basically nothing.

Any help would be appreciated.
LVL 35
Joseph DalyAsked:
Who is Participating?
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.

Andrew Hancock (VMware vExpert / EE MVE^2)VMware and Virtualization ConsultantCommented:
It's based on the  Windows OS and has far more support for different drivers and hardware than ESXi.

Hence why ESXi has a smaller footprint, in terms of installation and memory usage.

Hyper-V server 2012  R2 is FREE, that's a benefit.

Is this Windows 2012 R2 Core ? (e.g. GUI or no GUI)
0

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
Joseph DalyAuthor Commented:
The server 2012 r2 with the hyper-v role installed is not the core install it is the full blown gui install and its still using less memory than the hyper-v r2 server bare metal install.
0
Andrew Hancock (VMware vExpert / EE MVE^2)VMware and Virtualization ConsultantCommented:
It would be interested to see, when the GUI is removed e.g. core
0
Has Powershell sent you back into the Stone Age?

If managing Active Directory using Windows Powershell® is making you feel like you stepped back in time, you are not alone.  For nearly 20 years, AD admins around the world have used one tool for day-to-day AD management: Hyena. Discover why.

Joseph DalyAuthor Commented:
You think removing the GUI would cause the server to use up more resources? Because thats whats happening super stripped down version of hyper-v is taking more resources than the full blown gui.
0
Cliff GaliherCommented:
Memory usage during a fresh install is higher as optimization routines run. You'll find that, as long as the workloads, drivers, hardware, and VMs are identical, they'll both settle down. Memory usage will be nearly identical as will CPU. The differences come in with disk space and security footprint.
0
Joseph DalyAuthor Commented:
These machines have been built and running for over a week now Im pretty sure all the optimization routines have been run. These machines have no workload on them and no vms currently strictly the base install.

If the "bare metal" version of hyper-v takes more resources than the full install what is the point? The difference in disk space between the two is 5gb which is negligible. Can you elaborate on the security footprint piece you were talking about?
0
Cliff GaliherCommented:
My inclination is that you have some significant driver differences then which is why I listed all the varietals that can have an impact. When all other parts are equal, installs with the smaller GUI take less memory. I can attest this first-hand.

As far as the security footprint, Google is your friend. This has been the subject of very long technical blog posts that I will not cut and paste in their entirety here. It is the primary reason there is core vs minshell vs full GUi vs desktop experience.
0
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
Virtualization

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.

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.