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."I like that the hardware is separated from the software definition of the components."
"The most beneficial feature is UCS Manager. It's the best way to manage hardware, creating group policies, like scrub policies and maintenance policies."
"It is less time-consuming to deploy the software."
"The solution is very reliable in comparison to the other brands."
"Great security and functionality."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the service profile."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is easily scalable."
"The solution is stable...The solution is scalable."
"The scalability has been good."
"The product has been simple to set up."
"It is easy to scale if you have the licensing."
"When it comes to the BladeSystem, what we love about it most is being able to actually manage it using OneView."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"HPE BladeSystem provides good commuting performance."
"The solution is scalable, offering flexibility and expansion options to meet changing business needs."
"The most valuable feature of the HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management and the robust design."
"It should be more user-friendly."
"The GUI is not the greatest."
"The graphic code that UCS can support is limited and less accessible than other systems."
"Cisco UCS B-Series competitors have similar features as they do, Cisco needs to make some changes to make their offering better."
"The management interface needs a lot of improvement. As it is right now, it's a pain to use. It's not user-friendly."
"Compared to the deployment of servers such as Dell XCDs, the deployment of UCS servers is more complex. They take longer to deploy."
"The UCS manager interface needs to be cleaned up a bit and can be streamlined, but no major complaints."
"HTML5 interface is a much needed improvement over the old Java interface, but still needs a little work."
"Currently, in the case of a disk failure there is a need to remove the whole bay and as a result, to disconnect all the other disks."
"The solution could improve by having more automation, such as the automatic mapping feature that is available in the Synergy Blade series."
"The support you get is dependant on the region. Some regions are better than others."
"The problem is that when want to expand with a new chassis, you have to do everything manually. It's not automatic."
"Storage capacity could be enhanced."
"I would like to see the upgrade path a little bit smoother."
"HPE BladeSystem can improve proactive monitoring."
"HPE BladeSystem that we are using is currently very old. It's not too good. We haven't renewed it. I would like the solution to have more updates."
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.