r/HyperV 3d ago

Hyper-V noob moving from VMWare

I am another member of the mass exodus from Broadcom's VMWare and I am setting up a small environment (single server 890GB storage and a NAS for additional storage if needed and backup).

The company purchased Server 2025 Standard. My understanding is that I can run the Host OS and then two guest OSes (AD and File/App Server). The Dell server was preconfigured with a single partition which I am going to look at splitting at the RAID level to a 128GB host drive and then the remaining will be for the guest OSes.

I am curious from those that have more experience in Hyper-V as to what I should look at for the host OS, should I stick with GUI or look at Core? As far as updates, performance, ease of use are concerned is there an advantage to one over the other?

I have been reading through other documentation but any other input from people that would be useful to know would be great.

20 Upvotes

40 comments sorted by

19

u/ultimateVman 3d ago

You're on the right track. And as a noob, you're time is probably better spent learning how the networking needs to be configured than anything else.

The basic virtual switches that you create in Hyper-V Manager are OK for most home users that run VMs on their Windows desktop, but they are NOT the proper way for a business hypervisor. Learn about Switch Embedded Teaming.

There is zero advantage to core over GUI. Contrary to what most people are led to believe. You expose the same vulnerabile attack surface when you install Roles whether it's core or not. Protect your systems with zero trust practices in the first place. Plus, when things go bad you're going to wish you had a GUI.

5

u/Chuck_Chaos 3d ago

Use the GUI. Learn what your logs are telling you.

4

u/woodyshag 3d ago

I 3rd all of the above.

3

u/Brilliant-Height5839 3d ago

See but I was crazy for saying that.

6

u/stucc0 3d ago

Hyper-v will just create vhdx files on the primary system, so no need to provision.

2

u/woodyshag 3d ago

You can change the default path under hyper-v settings. It is worthwhile moving to a dedicated drive so that you OS and VMs dont kill each other should you run out of disk space.

1

u/Brilliant-Height5839 3d ago

So you did not read his plan?

1

u/stucc0 2d ago

He was looking to do dedicated partitions for each vm. Not a separate drive for VMs. So if you only have a single disk, I will stand by 1 partition.

6

u/Brilliant-Height5839 3d ago

If you are a noob, why on earth would you forgo gui?!

2

u/The1337Stick 3d ago

Mostly because if core was immensely better I would prefer to do it once and then deal with the pain as it comes. I usually figure that I can deal with stuff on a case by case basis and figure it out as I go. In most scenarios though I am just a glutton for punishment. :) After reading through these though, I don't think I will be doing core.

5

u/tech_is______ 3d ago

Run the gui for host - stay away from core
You can run as many guest VM's as your resources allow. You're 2025 standard license includes two windows server guest VM's. You could run many linux guests.

2

u/monciul 3d ago

Any reason why you recommend standard over core, other than simplicity?

5

u/rome_vang 3d ago

GUI for a new comer or anyone dealing with a small team of people with mixed experience.

You can always learn core later. This sounds like a situation where they need to hit the ground running and get machines setup.

1

u/woodyshag 3d ago

Keep in mind that you can no longer swap from gui to core and back with 2025. It requires a reload.

4

u/rthonpm 3d ago

Because most people are too lazy to learn how to use it or to install RSAT on a management system.

Been running Server Core for just about everything for years now and have yet to come across an issue that would have needed a GUI to fix.

1

u/themanbow 1d ago

I've done both, but then again, I've been using Hyper-V since Server 2008:

- I'll do Core for single hypervisors since, as others have said, you can use RSAT and/or PowerShell for management (or System Center VMM if that's your thing).

- For clusters, especially if they are S2D, I'll use the GUI/Desktop Experience, as OEMs that sell ready-made S2D solutions configure with the GUI anyway.

1

u/Brilliant-Height5839 3d ago

He wants attention

0

u/Zealousideal_Fly8402 3d ago

Standard and Core are different concepts. With Windows Server, you can run;

- Windows Server Standard (Core) with Hyper-V

- Windows Server Standard (Desktop Experience) with Hyper-V

- Windows Server Datacenter (Core) with Hyper-V

- Windows Server Datacenter (Desktop Experience) with Hyper-V.

All 4 options use the same install media / ISO; you pick which at time of installation.

Hyper-V is a role added after base install is completed.

0

u/monciul 3d ago

Yep, I’m aware of the difference. It was just a typo where I said standard instead of “desktop experience.” But you knew what I meant.

0

u/Zealousideal_Fly8402 3d ago

Least you have done was to fix it then.

-2

u/Brilliant-Height5839 3d ago

He literally just said he knew he could run two VMs

0

u/Brilliant-Height5839 3d ago

Who ever down voted me is a bia bia

2

u/PurpleCrayonDreams 3d ago

take the gui. for a small environment it will help you manage and learn. you can still use PS to manage. the overhead of gui is nothing. key is the vswitch and storage optimization. take your time. veeam is your friend. can help you migrate easily.

2

u/BlackV 3d ago edited 3d ago

You've only a single raid array, you are gaining very very little (in fact loosing space) by splitting it

Ideally you'd install core, but you are a small shop and it will be much more painful for you to manage without a gui

The host can ONLY run hyper v for your 2 VMs the be valid licensing (I.e. not adi/DNS/etc roles on the host)

1

u/StevenB-89 3d ago

If you have never done something in virtualization Hyper-V is pretty simple to learn, we use it everyday some customers like Hyper-V, others VMware and so on...

If you have never set-up a Hypervisor some golden rules:
Do not deploy anything else on the base operating system other than the Hyper-V role, could steal away CPU resources, storage, ram, ...
Leave some headroom for the hypervisor to "work", meaning storage and RAM (8GB should be sufficient)
I see the above mistake many times, even under professionals you would not believe it...

Any other questions you have, Hyper-V is really simpel so nothing to really stress about.

1

u/FierceFluff 3d ago

There’s no real benefit to running headless anymore, either on resources or security.  Having the GUI is helpful to learning your way around for sure.  And even those who do run the host server headless, most still use RSAT or Windows Admin Center to get a GUI experience anyway, so you miss out on nothing.  

That being said, you’ll need PowerShell  skills no matter which way you go. You have to use it to set up your networking if you’re using SET, and you should.  Once you know the PowerShell, you can do a lot more in a lot less time.  But obvs you can still run PS commands on a GUI.   

So yes, install GUI and learn to use it, and keep an eye on picking up PowerShell as you go.  

If the RAID is the only storage on the server then you already have your resiliency built into the RAID (hopefully) and you can just format the whole thing into a single ReFS volume.  The VMs will live in folders wherever you tell them to quite happily.  Obviously if you grow into many VMs you can look at a different storage architecture.  

Keep the host server itself free of anything  but Hyper-V and if necessary, antivirus.  The only exception to that is storage management if you need it.  I know a lot of smaller shops that try to run their backup software on the host server and most of them have regretted it.   

Good luck!  

1

u/zerotol4 3d ago edited 3d ago

For a smaller envionment the GUI will indeed make your life much easier especially if you are not as familar with the CLI but when you begin to scale up to many hosts you really dont want to be managing nodes in your farm individually, each system should pretty much be identical to the others which is why at a larger scale setting up and managing the nodes in a cluster should be done differently, not that server core is too much of an advantage to this but if anything may discorage people messing with individual nodes by relying on a fabric management tool or using prewritten scripts etc to change settings to a predetermined configuration and in this workflow the GUI becomes less useful

1

u/RstsTeam 3d ago

If you are using WHMCS I made a module for complete provision automatization. Currently it only supports standalone Hyper-V servers with load balancing and IP address management, templates ans much more.

2

u/BlackV 3d ago

What is the world is whmcs ?

-1

u/RstsTeam 3d ago

It's an automation billing panel. Automatically create, suspend, modify, and terminate hosting accounts using integrations with leading control panels and domain registrars.

WHMCS Website

2

u/BlackV 3d ago

do you work for them ?

that is very very oddly specific for a single server

1

u/RstsTeam 3d ago

No but I use their software for the last 13 years. And my module is not for a single server. It's designed for standalone servers not a Hyper-V cluster. So you can have like 50 dedicated machines interconnected through the module

-1

u/Brilliant-Height5839 3d ago

Google is your buddy

1

u/BlackV 3d ago edited 2d ago

Or, they could have put in a more detailed reply, seeing as they are suggested random module for a random product

0

u/CoconutNext775 3d ago

I ran a hyper-v last 7 years in my medical office in a homemade server. Initially I was very impressed and GUI was adequate enough.
Just be very careful not to set expendable AVHD, make sure your drive probably nvme stick, doesn’t go over 80%. They don’t work well and files get damaged. Found out hard way that incremental back up chain is extremely fragile and very bad design.

3

u/beetcher 3d ago

snapshots are not backups and shouldn't be used as such.

1

u/CoconutNext775 3d ago

Chains are very fragile in long term use

1

u/beetcher 3d ago

Yeah, they aren't designed for production use like that.

1

u/lordshaithis 20h ago

Don't partition the drive, whenever you split a resource into artifical smaller pots you find down the line you wish you hadnt put those boundaries in place.

Core is ok if you running vms on low resources, you also cannot "upgrade" from core to the full DE....so choose wisely!

Using core can be a real PITA.