We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS B-Series and Pure Storage FlashBlade based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco, Dell Technologies and others in Blade Servers."The feature that I found the most value is the abstract and stateless capacities."
"Great security and functionality."
"The product's tech support has good people."
"Cisco UCS B-Series is scalable."
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"From a return on investment perspective, Cisco UCS B-Series is worth the money."
"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 very reliable in comparison to the other brands."
"It performs well and it is also very fast."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is performance."
"We have seen a reduction in the total cost of ownership by around 20%."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the rewrite speed and the nonstop services."
"It has absolutely simplified our storage because the dashboards on the consoles show a clear understanding of where you are, and it is also very easy to provision. This been a big help for our teams."
"It has also helped to simplify storage for us in the way that it's easy to manage. Their automatic monitoring really helps when things break or are about to break. They see a problem coming and alert us even before our own system does."
"The main feature I have found to be product replication."
"The solution is able to handle workloads and is easy to use. It allows us to actually manage the boxes in less time."
"The GUI is not the greatest."
"The configuration is a bit complex, as it requires very high technical expertise to apply it."
"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 price of this product is too high. They should work to make it more affordable."
"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."
"The configuration is a little bit complicated and could be made simpler."
"They need better integration with public clouds along with a better hybrid solution."
"There is some room for new features related to authentication and integration with Kubernetes, and other solution using S3 Bucket."
"Compared to, for example, Hitachi NAS, the solution is not mature at all. It's just in its infancy as far as technology goes."
"I would like to see the licensing fees improved as well as the price per terabytes."
"It would be beneficial if the layer could support the S3 protocol and be container ready in the next release."
"I would like to see more monitoring capability included in the next release of this solution."
"I would like to see more VM-Aware features in the next release of this solution."
"I would also like to see better support for CIFS workloads."
Cisco UCS B-Series is ranked 3rd in Blade Servers with 64 reviews while Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 6th in File and Object Storage with 31 reviews. Cisco UCS B-Series is rated 8.6, while Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.8. 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 Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "A high-performing and scalable solution that improves data performance for S3 workloads". Cisco UCS B-Series is most compared with HPE Synergy, Dell PowerEdge M, HPE BladeSystem, Super Micro SuperBlade and Lenovo Flex System, whereas Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), VAST Data, MinIO, Pure Storage FlashArray and Red Hat Ceph Storage.
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.
