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 solution has the ability to reuse or divide the networking, making it a flexible networking environment."
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"Some of the features I like from this solution are it has a fast configuration, it is not complex, and has high availability."
"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 most valuable feature is the service profile."
"The platform has valuable features for management and good monitoring tools. It provides efficient insights."
"It is a very robust and reliable solution."
"It is less time-consuming to deploy the software."
"HPE BladeSystem provides good commuting performance."
"The benefit is the density and the capability for global harmonization on the hardware, because all the hardware chassis are the same. We can also purchase the same network cards too, chassis by chassis, so it gives us a global solution."
"The solution is issue-free and works almost flawlessly."
"It is a stable, dependable solution."
"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 most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is its upgradability and centralized configuration."
"The interface and dashboard are excellent and user-friendly."
"The solution uses a smaller space in our data centers. It uses less feeder and network cable, which reduces costs."
"The product could be made more secure."
"The monitoring features and integration with other products can be improved."
"USC Central seems a bit confusing for technicians."
"Compared to the deployment of servers such as Dell XCDs, the deployment of UCS servers is more complex. They take longer to deploy."
"Cisco is expensive and difficult to manage. The product is not intuitive. It also needs to improve storage management and upgrades."
"The upgrades could be improved."
"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."
"It should be more user-friendly."
"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."
"The connectivity speed could be improved."
"The tool must provide integration with the cloud."
"OA updates and upgrades have to be made simpler."
"Storage capacity could be enhanced."
"There could be more management capability to work with integrations."
"The management side of this solution could be improved."
"The interface in terms of management could be much more intuitive."
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.