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."The solution is very reliable in comparison to the other brands."
"Since its UCS release in 2009, Cisco has extended the core functionality with Central, a tool for managing multiple domains"
"I like that the hardware is separated from the software definition of the components."
"The initial setup is pretty simple and straightforward."
"The solution has the ability to reuse or divide the networking, making it a flexible networking environment."
"From a return on investment perspective, Cisco UCS B-Series is worth the money."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to replace a server with another one, simply by applying the profile"
"The hardware is easily swappable and, utilizing the boot from SAN option, you can always keep your server intact due to the service profiles."
"Its ease of management, consolidation, connectivity, power, and cooling are the most valuable features."
"Remote management features are valuable."
"It is easy to scale if you have the licensing."
"The product is quite stable. Its performance is reliable."
"I have noticed that the solution does provide a very good ROI for companies."
"The solution is issue-free and works almost flawlessly."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The scalability has been good."
"Right now, the market is rapidly transitioning to solid-state media and the Cisco options tend to be less varied and more expensive than a broader slate of products from HP, Dell or IBM."
"The solution is expensive."
"For future improvements, it would be a benefit if the solution could integrate better with products such as Oracle."
"USC Central seems a bit confusing for technicians."
"HTML5 interface is a much needed improvement over the old Java interface, but still needs a little work."
"There are patches that cannot be implemented without any downtime or reboot required."
"Cisco UCS B-Series competitors have similar features as they do, Cisco needs to make some changes to make their offering better."
"The cost is expensive and has room for improvement."
"It is lacking in the ability to replicate virtual machines more easily."
"Non-disruptive firmware upgrades in all areas of blade technology."
"It could always use new tools."
"It is really stable, however the motherboard sometimes crashes."
"There have been some hardware failures with them. These failures have since been solved by HPE support partners."
"The management side of this solution could be improved."
"We have not needed to contact support because we have not had an issue. However, the partner support we had could improve. There are some disadvantages compared to Dell. The questions that are asked from the support are too lengthy, this causes a delay in support."
"HPE BladeSystems is an old technology that cannot fit all of the dynamic organizational needs of our company."
Cisco UCS B-Series is ranked 3rd in Blade Servers with 62 reviews while HPE BladeSystem is ranked 2nd in Blade Servers with 133 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.