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."It is less time-consuming to deploy the software."
"The ratio in terms of the number of units and the number of servers that we can get each chassis is quite good."
"The product's tech support has good people."
"I can connect Cisco UCS B-Series to multiple chassis and rack servers using a unified platform, then manage them on a single console."
"Since its UCS release in 2009, Cisco has extended the core functionality with Central, a tool for managing multiple domains"
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"I like that it's very manageable very easy to use and configure. I am not an expert, but the graphic user interface is quite simple very easy to use. It's a complete solution."
"The stability provided by the product is its most valuable feature for our organization."
"Modularity is a key feature that provides energy saving ."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"HPE BladeSystem is a scalable solution. It is a composable infrastructure which we can manage our external services. This is the one factor which I can see the server is much more suitable for the OneView console."
"It provides a secure access to the console and reliable administration."
"Its ease of management, consolidation, connectivity, power, and cooling are the most valuable features."
"It's very scalable."
"Virtual Fabric and interconnects are easy to configure and maintain."
"It is not expensive."
"The product could be made more secure."
"The integration is an area where Cisco UCS B-Series needs to provide users with more details."
"The solution is difficult to set up."
"There is a delay in the product's reporting and the rebooting system compared to servers from other vendors."
"USC Central seems a bit confusing for technicians."
"The main issue with this solution is that it is quite vendor-restricted, meaning that when we use third party software, we cannot use all of the available configuration tools or pre-validated design features."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
"The high price of the solution is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"We would like to see OneView software features as an additional feature."
"Non-disruptive firmware upgrades in all areas of blade technology."
"They could include some embedded software for container technology."
"Storage capacity could be enhanced."
"They should provide open learning materials and seminars for detailed knowledge of the product."
"HPE BladeSystem that we are using is currently very old. It's not too good. We haven't renewed it. I would like the solution to have more updates."
"HPE BladeSystem could improve the communication between the server and the storage."
"The connectivity speed could be improved."
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.