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 GUI makes is simple to use and deploy."
"Cisco UCS B-Series is scalable."
"The scalability is good because it comes with Fabric Interconnects, and you can directly add more blades as you go. Therefore, scalability is not a problem."
"The solution is stable."
"The most beneficial feature is UCS Manager. It's the best way to manage hardware, creating group policies, like scrub policies and maintenance policies."
"The initial setup is pretty simple and straightforward."
"Since its UCS release in 2009, Cisco has extended the core functionality with Central, a tool for managing multiple domains"
"It provides a secure access to the console and reliable administration."
"The solution has good performance."
"They are reliable, and they hardly break down. They are fast, and they serve us very well."
"When it comes to the BladeSystem, what we love about it most is being able to actually manage it using OneView."
"The most valuable feature of the HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management and the robust design."
"With just one cable, for redundancy let's say two, you can feed sixteen servers in a single c7000 chassis."
"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's very scalable."
"Integration with storage could be improved."
"The management interface needs a lot of improvement. As it is right now, it's a pain to use. It's not user-friendly."
"The initial setup process is complex."
"The price of this product is too high. They should work to make it more affordable."
"The monitoring features and integration with other products can be improved."
"The solution’s technical support could be better."
"The UCS manager interface needs to be cleaned up a bit and can be streamlined, but no major complaints."
"For future improvements, it would be a benefit if the solution could integrate better with products such as Oracle."
"OA updates and upgrades have to be made simpler."
"The scalability is limited because you only have a 16-server by chassis."
"The connectivity speed could be improved."
"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 BladeSystems is an old technology that cannot fit all of the dynamic organizational needs of our company."
"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."
"HPE BladeSystem could improve the communication between the server and the storage."
"It is lacking in the ability to replicate virtual machines more easily."
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.
