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 GUI makes is simple to use and deploy."
"The scalability is very good."
"The solution is stable."
"The feature that I found the most value is the abstract and stateless capacities."
"It's modular."
"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 Dashboard is quite impressive and is, so far, the best based on my experience."
"The platform has valuable features for management and good monitoring tools. It provides efficient insights."
"I really appreciate the integrated Onboard Administrator, the iLO (Integrated Lights-Out) modular network, and the SAN Switches."
"I like the stability."
"It also has a pretty solid design and management."
"The technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of management with the hardware."
"The solution has good performance."
"The solution uses a smaller space in our data centers. It uses less feeder and network cable, which reduces costs."
"The product has a lot of options for checking servers and IoT ports using artificial intelligence."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"The monitoring features and integration with other products can be improved."
"The configuration is a bit complex, as it requires very high technical expertise to apply it."
"The management interface needs a lot of improvement. As it is right now, it's a pain to use. It's not user-friendly."
"There are patches that cannot be implemented without any downtime or reboot required."
"The initial setup is not easy."
"The UCS manager interface needs to be cleaned up a bit and can be streamlined, but no major complaints."
"The graphic code that UCS can support is limited and less accessible than other systems."
"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."
"It is really stable, however the motherboard sometimes crashes."
"For me, the product is okay, but I would probably suggest improvement in their services or technical support. They need to work harder in the preventative maintenance of the system. They need to improve in terms of how quickly can we get attention and how quickly problems are resolved. Its price could also be lower."
"The integration and price of HPE BladeSystem could be improved."
"We would like to see OneView software features as an additional feature."
"There is always room for improvement everywhere with the HPE BladeSystem."
"It would be nice if the solution were cheaper."
"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.