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 most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is easily scalable."
"In terms of the flexibility of the tool to adapt to technology needs, I think it is a very good solution."
"The feature that I found the most value is the abstract and stateless capacities."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to replace a server with another one, simply by applying the profile"
"The solution is very reliable in comparison to the other brands."
"It is less time-consuming to deploy the software."
"The most valuable features are monitoring and processing, which can handle a lot of throughput and are more powerful than the HPE series."
"The GUI makes is simple to use and deploy."
"Remote management features are valuable."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its high availability."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"It is a stable, dependable solution."
"The product has a lot of options for checking servers and IoT ports using artificial intelligence."
"I have noticed that the solution does provide a very good ROI for companies."
"The solution is very fast and the power consumption is great."
"Wide choice in mixing SAN and LAN."
"There is a delay in the product's reporting and the rebooting system compared to servers from other vendors."
"It should be more user-friendly."
"The configuration is a little bit complicated and could be made simpler."
"The initial setup process is complex."
"Integration with storage could be improved."
"Next generation support for VMware needs to be introduced as it does not support eighth-generation VMware."
"Cisco UCS B-Series competitors have similar features as they do, Cisco needs to make some changes to make their offering better."
"The initial setup is not easy."
"The only side that must be improved is the active-passive interconnect module architecture."
"The solution could improve by having more automation, such as the automatic mapping feature that is available in the Synergy Blade series."
"The management side of this solution could be improved."
"HPE BladeSystem can improve by providing the latest generation processor engine, such as the I-Flex processor."
"It would be nice if the solution were cheaper."
"If the hardware offered higher efficiency, that would be an ideal situation for our company."
"They could include some embedded software for container technology."
"I would like to see the upgrade path a little bit smoother."
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.