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."I like that it's very manageable very easy to use and configure. I am not an expert, but the graphic user interface is quite simple very easy to use. It's a complete solution."
"In terms of the flexibility of the tool to adapt to technology needs, I think it is a very good solution."
"The scalability is very good."
"Great security and functionality."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the service profile."
"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 stability provided by the product is its most valuable feature for our organization."
"Stateless Blade is the best feature."
"For me, the most valuable features are integration and simple defining."
"The product has been simple to set up."
"This has drastically reduced our datacenter space, has good cooling and power consumption."
"Cabling complexity and volume have been reduced."
"It is a stable, dependable solution."
"The solution has good performance."
"The most valuable feature of the HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management and the robust design."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is its upgradability and centralized configuration."
"The initial setup process is complex."
"Cisco could improve the user-friendliness for less experienced users."
"The product could be made more secure."
"The cost is expensive and has room for improvement."
"USC Central seems a bit confusing for technicians."
"It should be more user-friendly."
"Integration with storage could be improved."
"The main issue with this solution is that it is quite vendor-restricted, meaning that when we use third party software, we cannot use all of the available configuration tools or pre-validated design features."
"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."
"The problem is that when want to expand with a new chassis, you have to do everything manually. It's not automatic."
"The only side that must be improved is the active-passive interconnect module architecture."
"The response time in terms of getting technical support assistance could be improved."
"Storage capacity could be enhanced."
"If the hardware offered higher efficiency, that would be an ideal situation for our company."
"The support you get is dependant on the region. Some regions are better than others."
"There is always room for improvement everywhere with the HPE BladeSystem."
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.