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 most valuable feature is the service profile."
"The solution is very reliable in comparison to the other brands."
"It is a very robust and reliable solution."
"The GUI makes is simple to use and deploy."
"The most valuable features of the Cisco UCS B-Series are reports for virtualization and the large memory it has."
"The initial setup is simple, and not very complex."
"The solution is stable...The solution is scalable."
"With just one cable, for redundancy let's say two, you can feed sixteen servers in a single c7000 chassis."
"The solution is very fast and the power consumption is great."
"Virtual Fabric and interconnects are easy to configure and maintain."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its high availability."
"The density of the BladeSystem, that we can keep adding blades as we need more VMs."
"HPE BladeSystem is a scalable solution. It is a composable infrastructure which we can manage our external services. This is the one factor which I can see the server is much more suitable for the OneView console."
"It also has a pretty solid design and management."
"This has drastically reduced our datacenter space, has good cooling and power consumption."
"The integration is an area where Cisco UCS B-Series needs to provide users with more details."
"Compared to the deployment of servers such as Dell XCDs, the deployment of UCS servers is more complex. They take longer to deploy."
"There are patches that cannot be implemented without any downtime or reboot required."
"The initial setup process is complex."
"The license is expensive. Cisco should decrease the delay in the delivery of their products."
"The upgrades could be improved."
"For future improvements, it would be a benefit if the solution could integrate better with products such as Oracle."
"The configuration is a little bit complicated and could be made simpler."
"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."
"We would like to see OneView software features as an additional feature."
"The solution could improve by having more automation, such as the automatic mapping feature that is available in the Synergy Blade series."
"They should provide open learning materials and seminars for detailed knowledge of the product."
"The only side that must be improved is the active-passive interconnect module architecture."
"I'd like to see an all-in-one packet in the future."
"Some part of virtual connections needs improvement."
"Higher bandwidth interconnects could be introduced."
Cisco UCS B-Series is ranked 3rd in Blade Servers with 62 reviews while HPE BladeSystem is ranked 2nd in Blade Servers with 133 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.