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 is the ability to replace a server with another one, simply by applying the profile"
"The most valuable feature is definitely the service profile."
"The scalability is very good."
"The solution is very unified and the technical team is very supportive, no help is needed from outside vendors."
"The Dashboard is quite impressive and is, so far, the best based on my experience."
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"I like that the hardware is separated from the software definition of the components."
"The Dual Fabric design allows for online/in-service upgrades during production with no impact."
"HPE BladeSystem is very easy to use."
"It is a stable, dependable solution."
"It also has a pretty solid design and management."
"No issues with scalability. We can scale by adding another enclosure."
"With just one cable, for redundancy let's say two, you can feed sixteen servers in a single c7000 chassis."
"They are very fast and very reliable. They are working under very tough conditions."
"The product has a lot of options for checking servers and IoT ports using artificial intelligence."
"One of the most valuable features I have found to be the enclosure. It is really easy to manage and everything is integrated. You are able to upgrade the software quite easily."
"The initial setup is not easy."
"We have to have Java to manage the infrastructure. It would be great if we can manage the infrastructure through a web browser."
"The solution is difficult to set up."
"HTML5 interface is a much needed improvement over the old Java interface, but still needs a little work."
"The initial setup process is complex."
"This product uses a converged network adapter because it is the only way to provide flexibility with both fiber and ethernet connections."
"Cisco could improve the user-friendliness for less experienced users."
"The solution is expensive."
"I would like to see the upgrade path a little bit smoother."
"This product needs a wider range of firmware compatibility matrix from the oldest to the newest blade server."
"HPE BladeSystem that we are using is currently very old. It's not too good. We haven't renewed it. I would like the solution to have more updates."
"It is really stable, however the motherboard sometimes crashes."
"I'd like to see an all-in-one packet in the future."
"HPE has a replacement system called Synergy, though it’s a more high-end system than the old C7000."
"They could include some embedded software for container technology."
"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.