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 stable."
"The product's tech support has good people."
"The hardware is easily swappable and, utilizing the boot from SAN option, you can always keep your server intact due to the service profiles."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to replace a server with another one, simply by applying the profile"
"The feature that I found the most value is the abstract and stateless capacities."
"Since its UCS release in 2009, Cisco has extended the core functionality with Central, a tool for managing multiple domains"
"Stateless Blade is the best feature."
"The most valuable feature that the B-Series has is related to the structure and architecture of the solution because in these solutions, you are using fabric interconnect as an interconnect device. The beauty of fabric interconnect is that it can work as in-house mode."
"The product has been simple to set up."
"The solution has good scalability."
"They are reliable, and they hardly break down. They are fast, and they serve us very well."
"The most valuable feature of the HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management."
"It is a stable, dependable solution."
"It is not expensive."
"They are very fast and very reliable. They are working under very tough conditions."
"One of the most valuable features I have found to be the enclosure. It is really easy to manage and everything is integrated. You are able to upgrade the software quite easily."
"Cisco is expensive and difficult to manage. The product is not intuitive. It also needs to improve storage management and upgrades."
"The license is expensive. Cisco should decrease the delay in the delivery of their products."
"Next generation support for VMware needs to be introduced as it does not support eighth-generation VMware."
"The product could be made more secure."
"The solution is expensive."
"The upgrades could be improved."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"The GUI is not the greatest."
"I would like to see the upgrade path a little bit smoother."
"OA updates and upgrades have to be made simpler."
"If the hardware offered higher efficiency, that would be an ideal situation for our company."
"The response time in terms of getting technical support assistance could be improved."
"The integration and price of HPE BladeSystem could be improved."
"The servers are a little bit huge, so it would be great if they could renew the size."
"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."
"I rate the stability of HPE BladeSystem a nine out of ten."
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 and HPE Superdome X. 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.