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 is stable."
"The solution has the ability to reuse or divide the networking, making it a flexible networking environment."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the service profile."
"In terms of the flexibility of the tool to adapt to technology needs, I think it is a very good solution."
"The Dual Fabric design allows for online/in-service upgrades during production with no impact."
"The solution is stable...The solution is scalable."
"The most beneficial feature is UCS Manager. It's the best way to manage hardware, creating group policies, like scrub policies and maintenance policies."
"The platform has valuable features for management and good monitoring tools. It provides efficient insights."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"They are reliable, and it's relatively easy to manage them. They also regularly provide patching for the servers."
"The interface and dashboard are excellent and user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is its upgradability and centralized configuration."
"It is a stable, dependable solution."
"We are very happy with flexible NIC configuration features which are possible if you combine the BladeServers with HPE flex switches in the enclosures."
"The solution uses a smaller space in our data centers. It uses less feeder and network cable, which reduces costs."
"Its ease of management, consolidation, connectivity, power, and cooling are the most valuable features."
"Cisco could improve the user-friendliness for less experienced users."
"It is more expensive than the competitors."
"There are patches that cannot be implemented without any downtime or reboot required."
"The integration is an area where Cisco UCS B-Series needs to provide users with more details."
"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."
"The graphic code that UCS can support is limited and less accessible than other systems."
"The configuration is a little bit complicated and could be made simpler."
"For future improvements, it would be a benefit if the solution could integrate better with products such as Oracle."
"It may be coming to its end of life."
"This product needs a wider range of firmware compatibility matrix from the oldest to the newest blade server."
"HPE has a replacement system called Synergy, though it’s a more high-end system than the old C7000."
"I would like to see the upgrade path a little bit smoother."
"The problem is that when want to expand with a new chassis, you have to do everything manually. It's not automatic."
"It is lacking in the ability to replicate virtual machines more easily."
"There could be more management capability to work with integrations."
"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 and HPE Superdome X. 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.
