Should You Virtualize a Windows Terminal Server?

Question

Virtualization

The terminal server is now set up on a physical server, which has 2 Xeon processors (6 cores each) and a total of 32GB of RAM. The OS is Windows Server 2019 Std. The only purpose of the terminal server is to work with 1C. The maximum number of terminal users is 10 pcs.
Is it worth making the terminal server a KVM virtual machine with this configuration?
There was a need for virtual machines (for example, a domain controller), and there are no more physical servers for these purposes (the management is still against procurement). Will it be efficient to raise several VMs on one physical hypervisor, one of which is a terminal server?

Answer 1

In terms of role separation, virtualizing everything is the only way out when there is a shortage of hardware.
However, you and your management should think about the fact that a (hardware) crash of a single server without a backup will seriously affect business processes, since restoring the same functionality on new hardware will result in a long wait for the procurement process, etc., etc.
If you have two markers, then you can paint the entire server in general, then
1. virtualization and
2. clustering (for example, in the event of a server crash, everything moves to the second, weaker one, but it works)
will greatly help the business not to be idle due to a hardware problem.

Answer 2

Well, you see what is more convenient for you, better, more functional and acceptable.
But I would virtualize, for 10 1C users there are a lot of such a number of RAM, and not all cores are needed by the process.
I have virtual terminals. And under different bases different virtual machines

Answer 3

All my terminals are virtual, they work. The question is, is the performance enough?
Ps: Xeon in 2010 and 2019, stones are very different in performance, one core of 2019 will overtake the core of 2010, exactly 2 times, so specify which Xeon.