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 most valuable features of the solution are stability and security."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the service profile."
"The solution is stable...The solution is scalable."
"The solution has the ability to reuse or divide the networking, making it a flexible networking environment."
"The solution's most valuable feature is KVM Launch Manager."
"The solution is stable."
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"I like that the hardware is separated from the software definition of the components."
"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 solution has good performance."
"The density of the BladeSystem, that we can keep adding blades as we need more VMs."
"The product has been simple to set up."
"Wide choice in mixing SAN and LAN."
"The solution has good scalability."
"They are very fast and very reliable. They are working under very tough conditions."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is simplified management."
"Next generation support for VMware needs to be introduced as it does not support eighth-generation VMware."
"USC Central seems a bit confusing for technicians."
"The GUI is not the greatest."
"The product could be made more secure."
"Cisco is expensive and difficult to manage. The product is not intuitive. It also needs to improve storage management and upgrades."
"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."
"Compared to the deployment of servers such as Dell XCDs, the deployment of UCS servers is more complex. They take longer to deploy."
"The license is expensive. Cisco should decrease the delay in the delivery of their products."
"The latest version of this system is called Synergy from HPE, and it comes with more advanced features. This is currently the most advanced solution available in the market. One of its key features is its energy efficiency, which optimizes energy usage."
"Higher bandwidth interconnects could be introduced."
"It will be discontinued so we will have to change to another product shortly."
"We would like to see OneView software features as an additional feature."
"They could include some embedded software for container technology."
"If the hardware offered higher efficiency, that would be an ideal situation for our company."
"The connectivity speed could be improved."
"HPE has a replacement system called Synergy, though it’s a more high-end system than the old C7000."
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.