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."Great security and functionality."
"The most valuable features of the Cisco UCS B-Series are reports for virtualization and the large memory it has."
"The initial setup is pretty simple and straightforward."
"I can connect Cisco UCS B-Series to multiple chassis and rack servers using a unified platform, then manage them on a single console."
"Cisco UCS B-Series is scalable."
"From a return on investment perspective, Cisco UCS B-Series is worth the money."
"I like that it's very manageable very easy to use and configure. I am not an expert, but the graphic user interface is quite simple very easy to use. It's a complete solution."
"It is less time-consuming to deploy the software."
"HPE BladeSystem provides good commuting performance."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is its upgradability and centralized configuration."
"The benefit is the density and the capability for global harmonization on the hardware, because all the hardware chassis are the same. We can also purchase the same network cards too, chassis by chassis, so it gives us a global solution."
"It also has a pretty solid design and management."
"The most valuable feature of the HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management."
"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."
"The technical support is good."
"Basically, in a cluster, it works really nicely, especially within a cluster environment. Also, it's easily configurable."
"The configuration is a little bit complicated and could be made simpler."
"Compared to the deployment of servers such as Dell XCDs, the deployment of UCS servers is more complex. They take longer to deploy."
"This product uses a converged network adapter because it is the only way to provide flexibility with both fiber and ethernet connections."
"Cisco is expensive and difficult to manage. The product is not intuitive. It also needs to improve storage management and upgrades."
"The solution’s technical support could be better."
"The management interface needs a lot of improvement. As it is right now, it's a pain to use. It's not user-friendly."
"There is a delay in the product's reporting and the rebooting system compared to servers from other vendors."
"This model does not support virtualization of the switch."
"The solution could improve by having more automation, such as the automatic mapping feature that is available in the Synergy Blade series."
"It may be coming to its end of life."
"We had a few hard drives that crashed, and we couldn't find them locally. We've tried internationally, but we are still struggling to get its spare parts. This is the main challenge that we have faced with this solution. Fortunately, the other drives are still working. There should be easy availability of spare parts. I should be able to request a quotation online from HPE for things that I am not able to get locally. Currently, I can order online, but when I type the serial number, most of the time, it is rejected. I don't know why it is happening. It could be because the company that sold us the system didn't buy it through the normal HPE channel. HPE should assist us as users to get the spare parts. Its security needs to be beefed up. I would like some security features. It was also challenging for us to set it up because we didn't get enough training from them."
"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 management side of this solution could be improved."
"OA updates and upgrades have to be made simpler."
"We would like to see OneView software features as an additional feature."
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.