We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS B-Series and HPE BladeSystem based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Blade Servers solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Since its UCS release in 2009, Cisco has extended the core functionality with Central, a tool for managing multiple domains"
"The most valuable features of the solution are stability and security."
"It's modular."
"Stateless Blade is the best feature."
"The most valuable feature is the service profile."
"The ratio in terms of the number of units and the number of servers that we can get each chassis is quite good."
"The solution is stable...The solution is scalable."
"The solution is very reliable in comparison to the other brands."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of management with the hardware."
"The most valuable feature, of course, is its size as I can build a huge compute resource on it."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"When it comes to the BladeSystem, what we love about it most is being able to actually manage it using OneView."
"I have noticed that the solution does provide a very good ROI for companies."
"With just one cable, for redundancy let's say two, you can feed sixteen servers in a single c7000 chassis."
"The technical support is good."
"It is very stable."
"It should be more user-friendly."
"Compared to the deployment of servers such as Dell XCDs, the deployment of UCS servers is more complex. They take longer to deploy."
"Its scalability could be better."
"For future improvements, it would be a benefit if the solution could integrate better with products such as Oracle."
"This model does not support virtualization of the switch."
"The pricing could be less."
"The GUI is not the greatest."
"USC Central seems a bit confusing for technicians."
"We would like to see OneView software features as an additional feature."
"The interface in terms of management could be much more intuitive."
"If you compare it with Lenovo systems, the pricing is too high."
"This product needs a wider range of firmware compatibility matrix from the oldest to the newest blade server."
"It is really stable, however the motherboard sometimes crashes."
"Non-disruptive firmware upgrades in all areas of blade technology."
"We sometimes have compatibility issues depending on the browser that you are using. For example, sometimes you have to switch between Edge, Mozilla, Internet Explorer, or Chrome to have things operating correctly."
"The servers are a little bit huge, so it would be great if they could renew the size."
Cisco UCS B-Series is ranked 3rd in Blade Servers with 64 reviews while HPE BladeSystem is ranked 2nd in Blade Servers with 134 reviews. Cisco UCS B-Series is rated 8.6, while HPE BladeSystem is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS B-Series writes "Robust hardware and efficient management of hardware, creating group policies, such as scrub policies and maintenance policies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE BladeSystem writes "Very reliable, expands well, and is pretty simple to set up". Cisco UCS B-Series is most compared with HPE Synergy, Dell PowerEdge M, Super Micro SuperBlade, Pure Storage FlashBlade and Lenovo Flex System, whereas HPE BladeSystem is most compared with HPE Synergy, Dell PowerEdge M, Super Micro SuperBlade, HPE Superdome X and Pure Storage FlashBlade. See our Cisco UCS B-Series vs. HPE BladeSystem report.
See our list of best Blade Servers vendors.
We monitor all Blade Servers 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.