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 solution has the ability to reuse or divide the networking, making it a flexible networking environment."
"The GUI makes is simple to use and deploy."
"The product's tech support has good people."
"The scalability is very good."
"The platform has valuable features for management and good monitoring tools. It provides efficient insights."
"It's modular."
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"The solution is stable."
"We are very happy with flexible NIC configuration features which are possible if you combine the BladeServers with HPE flex switches in the enclosures."
"This has drastically reduced our datacenter space, has good cooling and power consumption."
"For me, the most valuable features are integration and simple defining."
"The product has been simple to set up."
"The most valuable feature, of course, is its size as I can build a huge compute resource on it."
"Basically, in a cluster, it works really nicely, especially within a cluster environment. Also, it's easily configurable."
"The technical support is good."
"It's very scalable."
"The product could be made more secure."
"Cisco could improve the user-friendliness for less experienced users."
"There are patches that cannot be implemented without any downtime or reboot required."
"We have to have Java to manage the infrastructure. It would be great if we can manage the infrastructure through a web browser."
"This model does not support virtualization of the switch."
"It is more expensive than the competitors."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved and made cheaper."
"The solution is expensive."
"The tool must provide integration with the cloud."
"We have not needed to contact support because we have not had an issue. However, the partner support we had could improve. There are some disadvantages compared to Dell. The questions that are asked from the support are too lengthy, this causes a delay in support."
"I rate the stability of HPE BladeSystem a nine out of ten."
"It may be coming to its end of life."
"Non-disruptive firmware upgrades in all areas of blade technology."
"The only side that must be improved is the active-passive interconnect module architecture."
"It could always use new tools."
"I would like to see the upgrade path a little bit smoother."
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.