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."
"It is less time-consuming to deploy the software."
"It's modular."
"The product is easy to use."
"The stability provided by the product is its most valuable feature for our organization."
"The initial setup is pretty simple and straightforward."
"The solution is stable."
"Since its UCS release in 2009, Cisco has extended the core functionality with Central, a tool for managing multiple domains"
"Wide choice in mixing SAN and LAN."
"The product has a lot of options for checking servers and IoT ports using artificial intelligence."
"HPE BladeSystem provides good commuting performance."
"The most valuable feature, of course, is its size as I can build a huge compute resource on it."
"The technical support is good."
"It's very scalable."
"I really appreciate the integrated Onboard Administrator, the iLO (Integrated Lights-Out) modular network, and the SAN Switches."
"The solution has high performance."
"USC Central seems a bit confusing for technicians."
"There is a delay in the product's reporting and the rebooting system compared to servers from other vendors."
"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."
"It should be more user-friendly."
"The product could be made more secure."
"Cisco is expensive and difficult to manage. The product is not intuitive. It also needs to improve storage management and upgrades."
"HTML5 interface is a much needed improvement over the old Java interface, but still needs a little work."
"The upgrades could be improved."
"Really look at it closely, but really look at the Synergy product as well. That seems to me like that's the next evolution of the BladeSystem."
"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."
"OA updates and upgrades have to be made simpler."
"It may be coming to its end of life."
"We would like to see OneView software features as an additional feature."
"I would like OneView to go over the current limit of 40 instances."
"HPE BladeSystem can improve by providing the latest generation processor engine, such as the I-Flex processor."
"It could always use new tools."
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.