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 architecture of this solution is very valuable; it has five traffic interconnects, and uses a network highway so bandwidth is never an issue."
"Since its UCS release in 2009, Cisco has extended the core functionality with Central, a tool for managing multiple domains"
"The Dashboard is quite impressive and is, so far, the best based on my experience."
"Cisco UCS B-Series is scalable."
"The product's tech support has good people."
"The most valuable features are monitoring and processing, which can handle a lot of throughput and are more powerful than the HPE series."
"Stateless Blade is the best feature."
"The solution's most valuable feature is KVM Launch Manager."
"The solution has good scalability."
"Basically, in a cluster, it works really nicely, especially within a cluster environment. Also, it's easily configurable."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of management with the hardware."
"The solution uses less cabling and less space in the data center."
"With just one cable, for redundancy let's say two, you can feed sixteen servers in a single c7000 chassis."
"The solution is issue-free and works almost flawlessly."
"The most valuable feature, of course, is its size as I can build a huge compute resource on it."
"It is not expensive."
"Its scalability could be better."
"We have to have Java to manage the infrastructure. It would be great if we can manage the infrastructure through a web browser."
"The GUI is not the greatest."
"There are patches that cannot be implemented without any downtime or reboot required."
"Cisco could improve the user-friendliness for less experienced users."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved and made cheaper."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
"The configuration is a bit complex, as it requires very high technical expertise to apply it."
"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."
"There could be more management capability to work with integrations."
"We would like to see OneView software features as an additional feature."
"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'd like to see an all-in-one packet in the future."
"The response time in terms of getting technical support assistance could be improved."
"HPE has a replacement system called Synergy, though it’s a more high-end system than the old C7000."
"The integration and price of HPE BladeSystem 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.