We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS Manager and HPE OneView based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Cisco Infrastructure is one of the top vendors and no one can beat them in terms of switching and routing."
"Cisco UCS has different layers of security, and you can do multiple installations of your LIAMs on top of the server and Blade. You can install VMware, Windows Server, Hyper-V, etc."
"Technical support has been good so far. We haven't had any issues with them. We're satisfied with the level of service they provide our company."
"I can deploy something in my 50-odd servers all in one go, in parallel, whereas if I was to do that individually, it could be a nightmare."
"Ease of management is certainly the most valuable feature in this product."
"It is more robust than other solutions. So, the stability is good."
"When one server fails, we can attach the service profile to a new server, which saves a lot of time."
"The solution is highly scalable, mainly because of the templates that make it easy for you to actually edit on the system."
"Administration-wise it's going to be easier. More smooth and more flexible."
"Easy to add servers and get them monitored and manageable."
"We also have the 3PAR and the GUI is almost the same. So the recognition is very good."
"OneView provides a single console, which is manageable without physical access."
"The solution's initial setup process was easy...The technical support is good...It is a stable product, and we will use it for a long time."
"It's rather simple to use, and that's very important for us."
"By being able to deploy servers very quickly and rapidly, we can respond to any business requirement needed."
"The easy user interface was what I found most valuable in HPE OneView. For example, if I wanted to know the infrastructure status or I needed to send in any change commands, HPE OneView had simple buttons."
"I want to be able to schedule multiple sequential updates in one go."
"The installation and upgrade sytems need to be improved."
"We have three data centers and if we could manage all three data centers using one interface, it would be great."
"The integration with other solutions could be better. I think Cisco can only integrate using Intersight. There is a second interface available as a SaaS platform, in the cloud, or on-premise. It's based on the Redfish protocol, which is standard for all the B-series servers in the market. We can integrate other solutions using API."
"I found it a bit of a challenge to get training on UCSM. I've been trying to get that for some time now. I feel like I have to figure it out a lot of things myself. For years I've to log calls with support whenever I've got challenges that I cannot resolve. If I had some training or more manuals, I'd be better able to handle more things on my own."
"Its user interface can be improved. It can be more user-friendly."
"There is room for improvement in the software part of Cisco UCS Manager. It should be more user-friendly, especially when creating policies."
"Cisco UCS Manager is not a scalable solution because once you have 160 blades, it cannot be expanded more."
"Specifically, it would be great if we had the ability to reapply the server profile faster."
"The solution could add storage, integration services, and end-to-end support for Cisco switches or other competitor products."
"It needs more reporting capabilities."
"I think HPE could make more user-friendly interfaces, exclude Java and move to an HTML5 platform, make more detailed documentation, and lower the price."
"I had some minor difficulties with upgrading, but the solution still works fine."
"Technical support is not very good. The engineers do not know a lot about the product, even when asked simplistic questions."
"The interface is a bit bland. It does its job, but it could have a better interface."
"Does not allow for switch configuration other than through OneView."
Cisco UCS Manager is ranked 29th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 21 reviews while HPE OneView is ranked 17th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 80 reviews. Cisco UCS Manager is rated 8.0, while HPE OneView is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS Manager writes "Used to manage servers, monitor or manage firmware upgrades, and push policies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE OneView writes "Provides firmware compliance and the ability to connect to iPO". Cisco UCS Manager is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Nutanix Prism, Zabbix, Datadog and Moogsoft, whereas HPE OneView is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Dell CloudIQ, Zabbix, Lenovo XClarity Orchestrator and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our Cisco UCS Manager vs. HPE OneView report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
