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 is the ability to replace a server with another one, simply by applying the profile"
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is easily scalable."
"The solution has the ability to reuse or divide the networking, making it a flexible networking environment."
"The solution is very reliable in comparison to the other brands."
"I like that it's very manageable very easy to use and configure. I am not an expert, but the graphic user interface is quite simple very easy to use. It's a complete solution."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution's most valuable feature is KVM Launch Manager."
"The feature that I found the most value is the abstract and stateless capacities."
"Cabling complexity and volume have been reduced."
"It is easy to scale if you have the licensing."
"Wide choice in mixing SAN and LAN."
"It also has a pretty solid design and management."
"The technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management. It is easy to communicate from the server to the storage."
"The product is quite stable. Its performance is reliable."
"The interface and dashboard are excellent and user-friendly."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
"This product uses a converged network adapter because it is the only way to provide flexibility with both fiber and ethernet connections."
"We have to have Java to manage the infrastructure. It would be great if we can manage the infrastructure through a web browser."
"Cisco could improve the user-friendliness for less experienced users."
"There is a delay in the product's reporting and the rebooting system compared to servers from other vendors."
"The product could be made more secure."
"There are patches that cannot be implemented without any downtime or reboot required."
"It should be more user-friendly."
"The servers are a little bit huge, so it would be great if they could renew the size."
"The price of the solution has room for improvement."
"HPE BladeSystem can improve proactive monitoring."
"Storage capacity could be enhanced."
"HPE BladeSystem can improve by providing the latest generation processor engine, such as the I-Flex processor."
"It could always use new tools."
"The management side of this solution could be improved."
"The only side that must be improved is the active-passive interconnect module architecture."
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.