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 has the ability to reuse or divide the networking, making it a flexible networking environment."
"The ratio in terms of the number of units and the number of servers that we can get each chassis is quite good."
"Since its UCS release in 2009, Cisco has extended the core functionality with Central, a tool for managing multiple domains"
"The most valuable feature is the service profile."
"The Dual Fabric design allows for online/in-service upgrades during production with no impact."
"The scalability is very good."
"The most valuable features are monitoring and processing, which can handle a lot of throughput and are more powerful than the HPE series."
"The solution is stable."
"They are very fast and very reliable. They are working under very tough conditions."
"HPE BladeSystem is very easy to use."
"It is not expensive."
"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."
"Remote management features are valuable."
"It's very scalable."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its high availability."
"It provides a secure access to the console and reliable administration."
"Right now, the market is rapidly transitioning to solid-state media and the Cisco options tend to be less varied and more expensive than a broader slate of products from HP, Dell or IBM."
"The initial setup process is complex."
"The initial setup is not easy."
"The management interface needs a lot of improvement. As it is right now, it's a pain to use. It's not user-friendly."
"The license is expensive. Cisco should decrease the delay in the delivery of their products."
"Cisco UCS B-Series competitors have similar features as they do, Cisco needs to make some changes to make their offering better."
"The high price of the solution is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"There is a delay in the product's reporting and the rebooting system compared to servers from other vendors."
"The response time in terms of getting technical support assistance could be improved."
"We would like to see OneView software features as an additional feature."
"It could always use new tools."
"It will be discontinued so we will have to change to another product shortly."
"This product needs a wider range of firmware compatibility matrix from the oldest to the newest blade server."
"The support you get is dependant on the region. Some regions are better than others."
"It may be coming to its end of life."
"Non-disruptive firmware upgrades in all areas of blade technology."
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.