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."It is a very robust and reliable solution."
"The feature that I found the most value is the abstract and stateless capacities."
"The most valuable feature is the service profile."
"It is less time-consuming to deploy the software."
"Since its UCS release in 2009, Cisco has extended the core functionality with Central, a tool for managing multiple domains"
"The scalability is good because it comes with Fabric Interconnects, and you can directly add more blades as you go. Therefore, scalability is not a problem."
"From a return on investment perspective, Cisco UCS B-Series is worth the money."
"Some of the features I like from this solution are it has a fast configuration, it is not complex, and has high availability."
"It also has a pretty solid design and management."
"I have noticed that the solution does provide a very good ROI for companies."
"The solution has high performance."
"For me, the most valuable features are integration and simple defining."
"The solution has good performance."
"Modularity is a key feature that provides energy saving ."
"This has drastically reduced our datacenter space, has good cooling and power consumption."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"Cisco could improve the user-friendliness for less experienced users."
"The configuration is a bit complex, as it requires very high technical expertise to apply it."
"The high price of the solution is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The initial setup is not easy."
"The graphic code that UCS can support is limited and less accessible than other systems."
"The license is expensive. Cisco should decrease the delay in the delivery of their products."
"We have to have Java to manage the infrastructure. It would be great if we can manage the infrastructure through a web browser."
"I'd like to see an all-in-one packet in the future."
"They could include some embedded software for container technology."
"I would prefer to have changes in the compatibility of the blade servers with the new ones designed by HPE, as the top team's version does not have it."
"The integration and price of HPE BladeSystem could be improved."
"It will be discontinued so we will have to change to another product shortly."
"HPE has a replacement system called Synergy, though it’s a more high-end system than the old C7000."
"HPE BladeSystem could improve the communication between the server and the storage."
"We have not needed to contact support because we have not had an issue. However, the partner support we had could improve. There are some disadvantages compared to Dell. The questions that are asked from the support are too lengthy, this causes a delay in support."
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.