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 initial setup is simple, and not very complex."
"The architecture of this solution is very valuable; it has five traffic interconnects, and uses a network highway so bandwidth is never an issue."
"I like that the hardware is separated from the software definition of the components."
"The solution's most valuable feature is KVM Launch Manager."
"The most valuable features are monitoring and processing, which can handle a lot of throughput and are more powerful than the HPE series."
"Stateless Blade is the best feature."
"The Dual Fabric design allows for online/in-service upgrades during production with no impact."
"The solution is very reliable in comparison to the other brands."
"HPE BladeSystem is a scalable solution. It is a composable infrastructure which we can manage our external services. This is the one factor which I can see the server is much more suitable for the OneView console."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is its upgradability and centralized configuration."
"The solution has good scalability."
"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."
"The technical support is good."
"Remote management features are valuable."
"They have served different needs for us from virtualized web servers to dedicated databases and application servers."
"The solution uses a smaller space in our data centers. It uses less feeder and network cable, which reduces costs."
"Its scalability could be better."
"The graphic code that UCS can support is limited and less accessible than other systems."
"The solution is expensive."
"The solution is difficult to set up."
"The cost is expensive and has room for improvement."
"Cisco UCS B-Series competitors have similar features as they do, Cisco needs to make some changes to make their offering better."
"The price of this product is too high. They should work to make it more affordable."
"This product uses a converged network adapter because it is the only way to provide flexibility with both fiber and ethernet connections."
"The interface in terms of management could be much more intuitive."
"The problem is that when want to expand with a new chassis, you have to do everything manually. It's not automatic."
"HPE BladeSystem could improve the communication between the server and the storage."
"Storage capacity could be enhanced."
"They should provide open learning materials and seminars for detailed knowledge of the product."
"I would like to see the upgrade path a little bit smoother."
"HPE BladeSystems is an old technology that cannot fit all of the dynamic organizational needs of our company."
"The support you get is dependant on the region. Some regions are better than others."
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.
