Review Mode Set 1 – AZ-104 Azure Administrator – Question 20

[Tyler L.]

With the way the options were displayed to me in the question, VM 5 would be created first, then VM4 (screenshot attached). However, the answer assumes that VM 4 was created first, so VM5 cannot be created (screenshot attached). This is confusing at best and makes the answers appear to be incorrect, however based on the order that I received the options in, my answers appear to be correct. I was asked about VM5 first, not VM4. I just wanted to make sure that there isn’t something that I am missing here. Thank you for your help.

[Irene-TutorialsDojo]

Hi Tyler L,

Thank you for reaching out and for sharing the screenshots! I completely understand the confusion caused by the shuffled order of the questions.

The scenario is based on the original order in which the virtual machines (VMs) are created. Accordingly, VM4 was intended to be created first, followed by VM5, and then VM6. However, since the answer choices were shuffled on your screen, it may have appeared that VM5 was created first, leading to a different interpretation of the constraints.

The key factor here is that the sequence of VM creation is determined by the original table rather than the order in which the answer options were presented in the question. This means that even if VM5 was listed first in your displayed options, the underlying logic still assumes that VM4 was created first, affecting resource availability for subsequent VMs.

I understand how this could be misleading, and I appreciate you flagging this. Your feedback is valuable, and I will share it with the team to ensure we improve clarity on how these types of questions will be presented in the future.

Please let me know if you have further questions—I’m happy to help!

Best,

Irene @ Tutorials Dojo

[Jason Brown]

Not sure if this was updated but I remember being confused thinking all the answers (VMs 4, 5, 6) were created independently, not that they were all being created sequentially.

[Margulan Aubakirov]

But here instead of 3 must be 11 (15 – 4 (VM1)). VM2 not counted since deallocated

[Irene-TutorialsDojo]

Hi Margulan Aubakirov,

Great catch, and thank you for pointing this out!

You are absolutely correct. The remaining Total Regional vCPU quota in North Central US should be calculated as:

15 (quota) – 4 (VM1 running) = 11 vCPUs available 

Since VM2 is in a Stopped (Deallocated) state, its 8 vCPUs do not count toward the regional vCPU usage. The explanation mentioning “3 remaining vCPUs” was incorrect and will be updated to reflect the accurate quota math.

We truly appreciate you bringing this to our attention — your feedback helps us maintain the accuracy and quality of our practice questions.

Best,

Irene @ Tutorials Dojo

[Deven Allen]

I disagree with this. Within the Microsoft Documentation, it states that both family vCPUs and regional vCPUs count deallocated vCPUs towards the total quota. So therefore, the correct answer would be VM 4 can be created, VM 5 can’t, and VM 6 can’t be created. Please correct me if I am wrong here.

[Irene-TutorialsDojo]

Hi Deven,

Thank you for flagging this and for attaching the Microsoft documentation, you are absolutely correct, and I sincerely apologize for the confusion caused by my earlier response to Margulan.

After reviewing the official Microsoft docs, quota is indeed calculated based on the total number of cores in use both allocated and deallocated.

Reference: http://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-machines/quotas?tabs=cli

This means VM2’s 8 vCPUs do count toward the North Central US regional quota, making the corrected calculation:

• Starting usage: VM1 (4) + VM2 (8, deallocated) = 12 of 15 vCPUs consumed

• VM4 (A2m_v2, 2 vCPUs): 12 + 2 = 14 of 15 ✅ Can be created

• VM5 (D2s_v3, 2 vCPUs): 14 + 2 = 16 of 15 ❌ Exceeds quota — cannot be created

• VM6 (A8_v2, 8 vCPUs): Also cannot be created ❌

The correct answers should be Yes, No, No — not Yes, Yes, No as currently stated.

My previous reply to Margulan, stating that deallocated VMs do not count, was incorrect, and I apologize for that error. We will be escalating this to our content team to update both the question answers and the explanation to reflect the accurate Azure behavior.

Thank you again for taking the time to provide documentation. This is exactly the kind of feedback that helps us keep our practice questions accurate and trustworthy.

Best,

Irene @ Tutorials Dojo