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 most valuable feature is the ability to replace a server with another one, simply by applying the profile"
"The initial setup is simple, and not very complex."
"The Dashboard is quite impressive and is, so far, the best based on my experience."
"The product is easy to use."
"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."
"Some of the features I like from this solution are it has a fast configuration, it is not complex, and has high availability."
"The most valuable feature is the service profile."
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"The solution uses a smaller space in our data centers. It uses less feeder and network cable, which reduces costs."
"This has drastically reduced our datacenter space, has good cooling and power consumption."
"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."
"The solution is very fast and the power consumption is great."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is its upgradability and centralized configuration."
"The most valuable feature of the HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management."
"The solution is issue-free and works almost flawlessly."
"The solution uses less cabling and less space in the data center."
"This product uses a converged network adapter because it is the only way to provide flexibility with both fiber and ethernet connections."
"The graphic code that UCS can support is limited and less accessible than other systems."
"HTML5 interface is a much needed improvement over the old Java interface, but still needs a little work."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
"Integration with storage could be improved."
"Cisco could improve the user-friendliness for less experienced users."
"It needs a better UI. Cisco makes a great product, but doesn't know how to make a UI."
"Cisco is expensive and difficult to manage. The product is not intuitive. It also needs to improve storage management and upgrades."
"I am not sure if iLO is included or if there is a separate license. If it is not included, it should be included in the license. It is such a valuable feature especially because people are working remotely."
"Storage capacity could be enhanced."
"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."
"We had a few hard drives that crashed, and we couldn't find them locally. We've tried internationally, but we are still struggling to get its spare parts. This is the main challenge that we have faced with this solution. Fortunately, the other drives are still working. There should be easy availability of spare parts. I should be able to request a quotation online from HPE for things that I am not able to get locally. Currently, I can order online, but when I type the serial number, most of the time, it is rejected. I don't know why it is happening. It could be because the company that sold us the system didn't buy it through the normal HPE channel. HPE should assist us as users to get the spare parts. Its security needs to be beefed up. I would like some security features. It was also challenging for us to set it up because we didn't get enough training from them."
"It may be coming to its end of life."
"BladeSystem is an old-fashioned server and not very well developed for new features and new areas of data centers, which is not very good for enterprise companies."
"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.