We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS Manager and HPE OneView based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The most valuable features are flexibility and management."
"I can deploy something in my 50-odd servers all in one go, in parallel, whereas if I was to do that individually, it could be a nightmare."
"It is more robust than other solutions. So, the stability is good."
"When one server fails, we can attach the service profile to a new server, which saves a lot of time."
"From a usability and functionality perspective, Cisco UCS Manager is very good."
"The interface is ergonomic and native. We can use UCS Manager to do all the configurations for the servers, including storage, networking, and all the other components we need inside the fabric. It's simple and flexible."
"Cisco UCS has different layers of security, and you can do multiple installations of your LIAMs on top of the server and Blade. You can install VMware, Windows Server, Hyper-V, etc."
"The management is one of the most valuable features of this solution."
"We lose less time managing the machines."
"The remote support automatically logs service calls and support cases with HPE, which is really good."
"We cannot function without this solution. "
"We could literally swap out a piece of hardware, slide one back into the chassis, and immediately - about three reboots later - it was identical. We didn't have to worry about configuring it, we didn't have to spend any time getting anything into place. It came back and it healed the environment almost immediately."
"Gives us one platform to monitor and access or configure all the servers or the 3PAR, etc."
"Gives the business interfaces to view real-time pictures of IT business services."
"Have a single plane of glass across all of the server platforms."
"Profile templates: The ability to generate the profiles and lay them down so the servers are built consistently. I would say that's probably the biggest piece of it."
"The installation and upgrade sytems need to be improved."
"The integration with other solutions could be better. I think Cisco can only integrate using Intersight. There is a second interface available as a SaaS platform, in the cloud, or on-premise. It's based on the Redfish protocol, which is standard for all the B-series servers in the market. We can integrate other solutions using API."
"The pricing can be better."
"We have three data centers and if we could manage all three data centers using one interface, it would be great."
"Cisco UCS is expensive compared to others. The Cisco UCS Chassis is more expensive than a standalone server, but some companies require standalone servers because of their production load and affordability. You need to pay more if you require more features on the Blade or if you need more ports on the switch."
"In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to their security."
"Its user interface can be improved. It can be more user-friendly."
"Cisco UCS Manager should have a simplified deployment in the sense of not having multiple machines, demilitarized zones, and on-premise options."
"The main problem that we run into, as far as stability goes, is when something loses its profile. Sometimes it requires jumping through a number of "hoops" to really get it back."
"I would like to see them expand into other cloud platforms, non-HPE platforms."
"Does not allow for switch configuration other than through OneView."
"I saw, maybe three years ago or two years ago here, or in Barcelona, at the HPE Discover conference, a feature that you can update Clusterware with VMware. But the feature is still not live in production. Currently, you have to do all the firmware updates and then you have to do the VMware updates. So you have two reboots and it would be better if it was just one."
"The interface is a bit bland. It does its job, but it could have a better interface."
"They can improve reporting and provide more customized reports. Currently, reporting is a bit limited. It can be complex to learn and manage for beginners. Because of my experience, I find it comfortable to manage, which might not be the case with beginners. It would be good if they can make it a little bit easier to understand. They can provide a more graphical view of connectivity and other things. Their technical support can also be improved."
"Sometimes the interface can be a little confusing, sometimes the error messages can be very cryptic, as far as what's actually going on."
"We've had a few issues. We just upgraded to the 3.9.0 version. We think that now that we are on that version, hopefully a lot of those things are going to go away for us."
Cisco UCS Manager is ranked 30th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 21 reviews while HPE OneView is ranked 17th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 80 reviews. Cisco UCS Manager is rated 8.0, while HPE OneView is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS Manager writes "Used to manage servers, monitor or manage firmware upgrades, and push policies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE OneView writes "Provides firmware compliance and the ability to connect to iPO". Cisco UCS Manager is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Nutanix Prism, Zabbix, Datadog and ServiceNow IT Operations Management, whereas HPE OneView is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Dell CloudIQ, Zabbix, SolarWinds NPM and Huawei eSight. See our Cisco UCS Manager vs. HPE OneView report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.
