SQL Server 2016 Compliance Risks: What You Need to Know After End of Support
PRIME is the Best Provider Data Management Platform of 2025 – awarded by MedTech Breakthrough. → Read More
PRIME is the Best Provider Data Management Platform of 2025 – awarded by MedTech Breakthrough. → Read More
Optimize and secure provider data
Streamline provider-payer interactions
Verify real-time provider data
Verify provider data, ensure compliance
Create accurate, printable directories
Reduce patient wait times efficiently.
02 May, 2025, 17 min read
Keeping SQL Server 2016 might feel like the easy choice. It’s familiar. It still runs. No one's shouting for change.
But under the surface, it’s draining your budget, exposing you to risk, and slowing down everything from compliance to innovation.
Microsoft has officially ended support for SQL Server 2016. That means no more security patches unless you pay extra. And even then, you’re not getting performance fixes, new features, or peace of mind.
In this guide, we’ll walk you through what it really costs to stay on SQL Server 2016 and how that compares to upgrading or moving to the cloud. You'll see:
Running SQL Server 2016 past its support window doesn’t trigger an alarm — but it should. Just because it hasn’t failed yet doesn’t mean it’s safe. The risks stack quietly, and the costs build fast.
Here’s what’s really at stake when you delay an upgrade:
Without regular patches, your environment becomes a magnet for exploits. SQL injection attacks, ransomware, and zero-day vulnerabilities find a home in outdated systems.
According to IBM’s 2024 report, the average cost of a data breach is $4.88 million. Staying on an unsupported platform multiplies that risk and shrinks your chance of recovery.
HIPAA, PCI, SOX, and GDPR all require patched, secure systems.
Using SQL Server 2016 without support makes your organization a red flag for auditors. Even without a breach, non-compliance penalties can climb into the hundreds of thousands or more.
Unsupported environments lead to:
Instead of improving systems or supporting new projects, teams stay stuck patching cracks in old ones. It’s costly not just in payroll, but in lost time, stalled initiatives, and missed innovation.
If you’re still running SQL Server 2016, Microsoft will offer you Extended Security Updates. But the price climbs quickly, and the value drops just as fast.
Microsoft’s pricing model for ESU gets heavier each year:
Year |
Estimated ESU cost (Per license) |
Year 1 |
~75% of the full license |
Year 2 |
~150% of the full license |
Year 3 |
~300% of the full license |
These estimates are based on Microsoft’s prior ESU programs. Actual cost may vary depending on your licensing agreement.
By Year 3, you’ll likely pay more in ESUs than it would cost to upgrade outright, and you still won’t get better performance, new features, or relief from future risk.
Extended Security Updates only cover critical security patches. Here's what you're not getting:
Not included in ESU |
Why it matters |
Performance tuning |
Slow systems stay slow |
Bug fixes |
Known issues linger |
New features |
No functional improvements |
Product support |
Pay extra for every ticket |
Staying on ESU doesn't just cost more upfront. It also delays any chance of modernization, which means:
Keeping SQL Server 2016 might seem like a stable choice, but behind the scenes, it’s piling up hidden costs. You won’t always see them in a single invoice, but they hit your infrastructure, your team, and your bottom line.
Here’s where that money (and time) is really going:
Most SQL Server 2016 environments are still running on infrastructure that's several refresh cycles behind.
That means:
Legacy SQL stack |
Modern environment |
Manual patching |
Auto-updates & monitoring |
Rack space, power, cooling |
Cloud-native hosting |
Frequent hardware failures |
SLA-backed uptime |
High-touch maintenance |
Low-touch, high-efficiency |
Older systems demand more care, patching, manual backups, legacy monitoring tools, and sourcing support for aging versions.
Every hour your team spends managing these tasks is time they’re not spending on automation, analytics, or security hardening.
Add in rising labor costs for SQL Server 2016–specific skills, and you’ve got overhead that grows every quarter.
Legacy systems often can’t keep pace with today’s workloads.
You’ll start to notice:
The result? End users wait longer, data teams work harder, and everyone gets frustrated.
Outdated environments often run bloated deployments with inefficient licensing models, especially if you’re still using Client Access Licenses (CALs) or haven’t rightsized your dev/test environments.
You could be paying for cores and servers you don’t need, just because it’s “easier” than untangling legacy sprawl.
Upgrading from SQL Server 2016 to a newer version — like SQL Server 2019 or 2022 — means some upfront investment. But compared to the spiraling costs of staying put, it’s a move that pays you back quickly.
Let’s break it down.
SQL Server licenses are priced per core. Here’s the current ballpark:
Edition |
Estimated Cost (2024) |
Standard Edition |
~$1,800 per 2 cores |
Enterprise Edition |
~$7,000 per 2 cores |
You’ll need at least 4 cores licensed per server. For example, upgrading an 8-core Standard Edition server would cost about $7,200.
Good news:
If you have Software Assurance or a Volume Licensing Agreement, you might qualify for deep discounts or upgrade credits, making the math even easier.
If you’re planning to stay on-premises, check if your servers are still fit for the next version’s needs.
Many teams use this moment to modernize their architecture, not just the database.
Microsoft’s upgrade tools, like the Data Migration Assistant (DMA), don’t cost a dime.
You’ll still want a plan for:
But the tooling itself won’t add surprise costs to your project.
Upgrading isn’t just about patch compliance.
You’re getting:
Over time, the upgrade cost pays for itself — usually within the first 12–18 months.
Path |
Estimated 3-year cost (8-core server) |
Value delivered |
ESU (3 years escalating) |
$120K–$150K+ |
Security patches only, no improvements |
Upgrade to SQL 2022 |
~$7K–$30K |
Full support, new features, future readiness |
Azure Managed Instance |
~$30K–$60K (AHB included) |
Cloud-native automation, scale, lower ops cost |
Moving SQL Server 2016 to Azure isn’t just about chasing the cloud trend. It’s about building a foundation that cuts hidden costs, improves resilience, and scales as your needs change.
But like any move, you’ll want a clear picture of what you’re paying for — and what you’re saving long-term.
Azure gives you flexibility in how you pay:
Payment model |
Best for |
Key advantage |
Pay-as-you-go (PAYG) |
Short-term, dev/test environments |
No commitment; pay only for what you use |
Reserved Instances (1 or 3 years) |
Production workloads |
Save up to 55% over PAYG |
Smart move:
Mix PAYG for dev/test environments and Reserved for production to control costs without losing agility.
Already have SQL Server licenses with Software Assurance?
Good news — you can use them in Azure through Azure Hybrid Benefit (AHB), cutting SQL costs by up to 70% compared to standard Azure pricing.
For example:
An 8-core SQL Server workload might cost $60K over three years without AHB, but only $30K–$35K with it.
Microsoft gives you:
You’ll still need internal or partner-led project management to keep things clean and fast, but the tooling itself won’t bust your budget.
When you migrate to Azure, a lot of things you used to manage manually come bundled in:
Every one of these would cost more to run manually on-prem.
With no guesswork and no surprise bills, Azure makes it easy to keep costs under control:
Done right, most Azure migrations recover their investment within 12–24 months — and keep saving you money long after.
Upgrading or migrating off SQL Server 2016 isn’t just about checking a compliance box. It’s about setting your organization up for stronger security, lower costs, faster innovation, and fewer fires for your IT team to put out.
Here’s what modernization delivers over the long haul:
Modern on-premises or Azure platforms reduce operational spend in ways legacy systems can't:
Fewer surprises. More budgeting clarity. Better use of every IT dollar.
Instead of chasing patch cycles and fighting outages, your IT team gets to:
Modern SQL versions and Azure services come with features that older systems simply don’t:
This results in stronger defenses against breaches — and fewer worries when audit season comes around.
When you're off SQL Server 2016, you can:
Modernization clears the path for real digital transformation and patchwork fixes.
While others stay stuck fighting legacy issues, you can:
Every dollar spent upgrading today makes you quicker, smarter, and harder to beat tomorrow.
Before Modernization |
After Modernization |
Unplanned downtime |
High availability |
Manual patching |
Auto-updates |
Compliance risks |
Audit-readiness |
Siloed apps |
API and analytics integration |
Not every organization needs to move overnight.
But every organization needs a clear plan and a sharp understanding of the real costs behind each choice.
Here’s a practical matrix to guide your SQL Server 2016 decision:
Best for:
Risks and costs:
Best for:
Benefits:
Best for:
Benefits:
Scenario |
Estimated 3-year cost |
Key outcome |
---|---|---|
Stay + ESU (Year 1–3 escalating) |
$120K–$150K+ |
Minimal benefit, growing risk |
Upgrade to SQL 2022 |
$28K–$40K |
Full support, security, and modernization |
Azure SQL Managed Instance |
$30K–$60K (with Azure Hybrid Benefit) |
Cloud-native efficiency, lower TCO |
It might feel easier, safer, or cheaper to stay on SQL Server 2016.
But when you look closer at rising Extended Security Update costs, hardware headaches, compliance risks, and lost productivity, the real cost isn’t in upgrading.
It’s in doing nothing.
Upgrading to SQL Server 2022 or migrating to Azure is a business decision that protects your budget, sharpens your operations, and positions your organization for growth.
Every year you stay on unsupported systems, you spend more and get less in return.
Atlas Systems can help you plan, execute, and maximize your move — whether it's an upgrade, a hybrid refresh, or a full Azure migration. It brings decades of modernization, migration, and database optimization expertise, helping you protect your investments, sharpen compliance, and drive growth.
Talk to our team today to map your best next step.
No. ESU costs escalate year over year. By Year 2 or 3, you’re paying more for limited security patches than it would cost to fully upgrade, without gaining new features, better security, or improved performance.
Licensing costs start around ~$1,800 per 2 cores (Standard) and ~$7,000 per 2 cores (Enterprise) in 2024 pricing.
Organizations with Software Assurance may qualify for free or discounted upgrades, lowering the real investment even further.
Not if you plan carefully. Reserved Instances, the Azure Hybrid Benefit, and autoscaling often make cloud infrastructure cheaper over time.
Done right, Azure can reduce long-term operational costs compared to traditional hardware maintenance and ESU fees.
You can. But it’s risky. Without support, you’re exposed to security threats, compliance penalties, and the growing costs of maintaining legacy environments.
It might “work” today, until a breach, a failed audit, or a critical failure proves otherwise.
Start with a free assessment using tools like Microsoft’s Data Migration Assistant (DMA) or Azure Migrate.
For a faster, more strategic roadmap, many organizations partner with experts like Atlas Systems to size the opportunity, calculate ROI, and build a low-risk plan forward.