Virtualized a physical server on the same hardware. Seems faster?

[rpeters83]

I have an older C2D machine that was running Windows 2012 with IIS, email, ftp, TFS, etc, (on bare metal) as well as the hyper-V role with couple guest VMs.

Last night, I created a VHDX copy of my physical server, removed the hyper-v role on that guest (obviously), and installed it to Hyper-V 2012 R2 on the same hardware. The VM guests that were originally on the old instance were moved alongside over to the hyper-v 2012 R2 instance.

Basically, the physical machine was converted to virtual, and its hosted VMs were moved "outside" onto the new host.

I'm not sure if I'm crazy, but the Win 2012 instance that I converted to virtual just feels faster and snappier. Not sure if just the removal of the hyper-v role was enough. Maybe it's just my imagination.

In my scenario, is it faster for the Windows 2012 guest to feel faster without the old hyper-v role?

 

[Chandler]

I have some 2950s that ran server 2003 - Just simply popping them into the 2950 as as single instance on one machine made the OS run faster - As to why I do not have a clue.

 

[lopoetve]

Simpler driver interactions, simpler api calls, better kernel design underneath for the hardware...

Virtualization has come a LONG way and is optimized to hell and back - way more than many base oses are, and on top of that, has been optimized to help them perform as well as possible

 

[0V3RC10CK3D]

It was setup kind of messy before, host work load plus running virtual machine workloads. Might have had issues trying to prioritize things.

Now it should be better with everything on an even playing field without the a full windows OS managing hardware resource distribution while trying to figure out other stupid things.