Hyper V hardware use? Esxi v Hyper V

[ictgoodpractice]

I am new to Hyper V. I am ordering a new server and have been told hyper V needs its own memory and cores to run.

 

On the other hand VMs ESXI does not.

 

Can anyone help please?

 

I apologise for my ignorance.

 

So one supplier suggesting Hyper V the other ESXi

Edited March 6, 2020 by ictgoodpractice

[synaesthesia]

ESXi is a little less resource hungry but not by much, but that depends how you're running Hyper-V. HV on a Core version of windows (no desktop) uses very little compared to HV on a full desktop experience windows server. Of course both hypervisors do need some processor, RAM and storage to run, and again ESXi has a smaller footprint on all. My personal preference is ESXi as it appears a little more cost effective and is quite a lot more customisable (you can edit a lot more on the guest operating systems), otherwise there's actually very little between them. Before diving in, I'd suggest having a play with both and going with your own preference.

[Norphy]

In terms of the bare hypervisor, there is very little to choose between them. If you're using the more advanced features then VMware has the edge but in terms on money, I have to disagree and say that Hyper-V is more cost effective as you get the entire feature set of Hyper-V as part of the Windows license (which you have to buy either way if you're running Windows VMs), whereas with VMware they have different tiers of licensing which enable different features.

 

However, if you're just using the free version of either product, give them both a try and see which you prefer. In terms of ease of setup, I'd say that ESXi has the edge as, assuming your hardware is on the HCL, it's a matter of installing it, giving it an IP address then setting up the product through its web UI whereas the initial setup of a Hyper-V server is more complicated.

[Davit2005]

I just love the update manager in ESXi compared with MS update, makes patching and upgrading ESXi hosts a breeze. You have to keep an eye on VMWare compatibility list before upgrades though

 

Personally Never got on with Hyper-V, but both have some negatives and positives

[mavhc]

Mostly depends on what you're paying for, if you're running Windows VMs on all your hosts, might as well use HyperV. If you're at the right size for VMWare costs to work out, small or large but not medium, and mostly running Linux VMs, I'd use VMWare.

 

HyperV has done some weird stuff, forgot its own vswitch and then nothing could connect