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 Dual Fabric design allows for online/in-service upgrades during production with no impact."
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"The hardware is easily swappable and, utilizing the boot from SAN option, you can always keep your server intact due to the service profiles."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the service profile."
"The solution is stable...The solution is scalable."
"Since its UCS release in 2009, Cisco has extended the core functionality with Central, a tool for managing multiple domains"
"The solution has the ability to reuse or divide the networking, making it a flexible networking environment."
"The scalability is very good."
"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."
"One of the most valuable features I have found to be the enclosure. It is really easy to manage and everything is integrated. You are able to upgrade the software quite easily."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"Wide choice in mixing SAN and LAN."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its high availability."
"The solution uses a smaller space in our data centers. It uses less feeder and network cable, which reduces costs."
"HPE BladeSystem provides good commuting performance."
"They are reliable, and it's relatively easy to manage them. They also regularly provide patching for the servers."
"The main issue with this solution is that it is quite vendor-restricted, meaning that when we use third party software, we cannot use all of the available configuration tools or pre-validated design features."
"The solution is expensive."
"The solution’s technical support could be better."
"We have to have Java to manage the infrastructure. It would be great if we can manage the infrastructure through a web browser."
"The cost is expensive and has room for improvement."
"There is a delay in the product's reporting and the rebooting system compared to servers from other vendors."
"Compared to the deployment of servers such as Dell XCDs, the deployment of UCS servers is more complex. They take longer to deploy."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
"The other similar solutions used different CLI commands than HPE BladeSystem. The HPE BladeSystem CLI commands should be the same as the other companies which would make it easier to manage. It would be better for the system administrators to manage HPE BladeSystem and other systems together. I wanted to configure this service with the CLI but the commands are different than the other solutions making it a bit more difficult."
"I rate the stability of HPE BladeSystem a nine out of ten."
"Storage capacity could be enhanced."
"For me, the product is okay, but I would probably suggest improvement in their services or technical support. They need to work harder in the preventative maintenance of the system. They need to improve in terms of how quickly can we get attention and how quickly problems are resolved. Its price could also be lower."
"I'd like to see an all-in-one packet in the future."
"The support you get is dependant on the region. Some regions are better than others."
"This product needs a wider range of firmware compatibility matrix from the oldest to the newest blade server."
"It is really stable, however the motherboard sometimes crashes."
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.