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."Great security and functionality."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the service profile."
"Some of the features I like from this solution are it has a fast configuration, it is not complex, and has high availability."
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"The most valuable features are monitoring and processing, which can handle a lot of throughput and are more powerful than the HPE series."
"Since its UCS release in 2009, Cisco has extended the core functionality with Central, a tool for managing multiple domains"
"The solution is very reliable in comparison to the other brands."
"The initial setup is pretty simple and straightforward."
"I like the stability."
"It is a stable, dependable solution."
"The interface and dashboard are excellent and user-friendly."
"When it comes to the BladeSystem, what we love about it most is being able to actually manage it using OneView."
"It is easy to scale if you have the licensing."
"The most valuable feature of the HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management and the robust design."
"HPE BladeSystem is very easy to use."
"No issues with scalability. We can scale by adding another enclosure."
"We have to have Java to manage the infrastructure. It would be great if we can manage the infrastructure through a web browser."
"The solution is expensive."
"It should be more user-friendly."
"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."
"Cisco is expensive and difficult to manage. The product is not intuitive. It also needs to improve storage management and upgrades."
"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."
"There is a delay in the product's reporting and the rebooting system compared to servers from other vendors."
"The price of this product is too high. They should work to make it more affordable."
"The tool must provide integration with the cloud."
"Higher bandwidth interconnects could be introduced."
"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."
"It will be discontinued so we will have to change to another product shortly."
"If you compare it with Lenovo systems, the pricing is too high."
"Storage capacity could be enhanced."
"The connectivity speed could be improved."
"I would like to see the upgrade path a little bit smoother."
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.