I run a small office with around 10–15 employees. Most people use basic accounting software and Microsoft Office, while two or three users occasionally work with lightweight AutoCAD drawings. The current computers range from older to newer systems, and they sometimes freeze briefly when someone opens a larger drawing, document, or accounting file.
I tested Windows Server 2022 with Remote Desktop Services on an existing server and the experience seemed smoother. Instead of maintaining 10–15 full PCs, I'm considering inexpensive wired thin clients that connect to one central server. The potential benefits are more consistent performance, less duplicated RAM usage, simpler backups, lower power consumption, easier expansion, and centralized storage. I'm considering roughly 12–16 CPU cores and 48–64 GB of RAM, with NVMe storage in RAID, a UPS, and daily backups.
The main concerns are RDS licensing, AutoCAD performance, the risk of one server taking down the entire office, and what happens if the server's motherboard, CPU, or RAM fails. Would RDS be a sensible choice for this environment, or would individual PCs managed through tools such as Intune be more practical and cost-effective?
4 Answers
RDS is still a valid option for 10–15 mostly light users, but it creates one large failure domain. If the server, storage, network, licensing, or RDS configuration fails, everyone may be unable to work at once. RAID improves availability and performance, but it is not a backup, so use tested backups, a UPS, and a recovery plan. Also test the AutoCAD workloads with several users active; CAD can require GPU acceleration and more resources than Office or accounting software. Price the Windows Server, RDS CALs, and Office licensing before assuming thin clients will save money.
Be very careful with the economics. The server is only part of the cost: include Windows Server licensing, user or device CALs, RDS CALs, Office licensing, backup hardware, UPS protection, replacement parts, and your time maintaining it. You should size for the busiest realistic period plus at least 20% headroom, not just average usage. A five-year total-cost comparison often makes separate business PCs look more attractive for a small office.
AutoCAD is the part I would test most aggressively. Even light 2D work can feel terrible over a basic remote desktop session when users pan or zoom, especially without suitable GPU support. A dedicated GPU or virtual GPU arrangement may be needed, which adds cost and complexity. Some businesses use remote access only for selected applications, but dedicated workstations are usually easier for CAD users to live with.
The CAD users say their drawings are light and don’t require much graphics power, but I would still test their real files with multiple simultaneous sessions before committing to thin clients.
For this size of office, upgrading the existing PCs may be simpler. Give the AutoCAD users better CPU, RAM, storage, and graphics hardware, then manage the machines centrally with automatic patching and device-management tools. You avoid making one server critical to the entire business and don’t need to maintain a specialized terminal-server environment.
The attraction of shared resources is that occasional heavy workloads could use spare capacity instead of freezing one person’s relatively weak PC. I’d also get a faster CPU for roughly the same hardware budget, so I’m weighing that against the added complexity.
I’m planning daily backups and testing the setup in a virtual machine first. My biggest unresolved issue is how to keep working if the server’s CPU, motherboard, or memory fails unexpectedly.