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 architecture of this solution is very valuable; it has five traffic interconnects, and uses a network highway so bandwidth is never an issue."
"I like that the hardware is separated from the software definition of the components."
"The stability provided by the product is its most valuable feature for our organization."
"The most valuable features of the solution are stability and security."
"The Dual Fabric design allows for online/in-service upgrades during production with no impact."
"Some of the features I like from this solution are it has a fast configuration, it is not complex, and has high availability."
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"The ratio in terms of the number of units and the number of servers that we can get each chassis is quite good."
"It is a stable, dependable solution."
"Uptime and service are valuable for us. When we have an issue, uptime and being able to get an emergency replacement or actual service is the most important thing for us."
"For me, the most valuable features are integration and simple defining."
"The most valuable feature of the HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management."
"The product has a lot of options for checking servers and IoT ports using artificial intelligence."
"The density of the BladeSystem, that we can keep adding blades as we need more VMs."
"It provides a secure access to the console and reliable administration."
"The solution has good performance."
"The monitoring features and integration with other products can be improved."
"The price of this product is too high. They should work to make it more affordable."
"There are some shortcomings in the product when you look at it from the perspective of the area involving multiple configurations, making it an aspect where improvements are required."
"There is a delay in the product's reporting and the rebooting system compared to servers from other vendors."
"The solution is difficult to set up."
"It needs a better UI. Cisco makes a great product, but doesn't know how to make a UI."
"Cisco is expensive and difficult to manage. The product is not intuitive. It also needs to improve storage management and upgrades."
"The GUI is not the greatest."
"If the hardware offered higher efficiency, that would be an ideal situation for our company."
"It would be nice if the solution were cheaper."
"Non-disruptive firmware upgrades in all areas of blade technology."
"The solution could improve by having more automation, such as the automatic mapping feature that is available in the Synergy Blade series."
"They could include some embedded software for container technology."
"The servers are a little bit huge, so it would be great if they could renew the size."
"HPE has a replacement system called Synergy, though it’s a more high-end system than the old C7000."
"It may be coming to its end of life."
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.