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 feature that the B-Series has is related to the structure and architecture of the solution because in these solutions, you are using fabric interconnect as an interconnect device. The beauty of fabric interconnect is that it can work as in-house mode."
"Great security and functionality."
"It is less time-consuming to deploy the software."
"The Dashboard is quite impressive and is, so far, the best based on my experience."
"The solution is stable...The solution is scalable."
"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 solution's most valuable feature is KVM Launch Manager."
"The most valuable features of the Cisco UCS B-Series are reports for virtualization and the large memory it has."
"HPE BladeSystem provides good commuting performance."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its high availability."
"I really appreciate the integrated Onboard Administrator, the iLO (Integrated Lights-Out) modular network, and the SAN Switches."
"The interface and dashboard are excellent and user-friendly."
"No issues with scalability. We can scale by adding another enclosure."
"HPE BladeSystem is very easy to use."
"They are reliable, and they hardly break down. They are fast, and they serve us very well."
"The solution is very fast and the power consumption is great."
"The license is expensive. Cisco should decrease the delay in the delivery of their products."
"For future improvements, it would be a benefit if the solution could integrate better with products such as Oracle."
"The graphic code that UCS can support is limited and less accessible than other systems."
"Next generation support for VMware needs to be introduced as it does not support eighth-generation VMware."
"The initial setup is not easy."
"Its scalability could be better."
"Integration with storage could be improved."
"We have to have Java to manage the infrastructure. It would be great if we can manage the infrastructure through a web browser."
"If the hardware offered higher efficiency, that would be an ideal situation for our company."
"I rate the stability of HPE BladeSystem a nine out of ten."
"The solution could improve by having more automation, such as the automatic mapping feature that is available in the Synergy Blade series."
"OA updates and upgrades have to be made simpler."
"The problem is that when want to expand with a new chassis, you have to do everything manually. It's not automatic."
"It would be nice if the solution were cheaper."
"There is always room for improvement everywhere with the HPE BladeSystem."
"HPE BladeSystems is an old technology that cannot fit all of the dynamic organizational needs of our company."
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.
