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 is stable...The solution is scalable."
"The solution is very unified and the technical team is very supportive, no help is needed from outside vendors."
"The architecture of this solution is very valuable; it has five traffic interconnects, and uses a network highway so bandwidth is never an issue."
"It is a very robust and reliable solution."
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"Cisco UCS B-Series is scalable."
"The scalability is very good."
"The product's tech support has good people."
"Basically, in a cluster, it works really nicely, especially within a cluster environment. Also, it's easily configurable."
"They have served different needs for us from virtualized web servers to dedicated databases and application servers."
"This has drastically reduced our datacenter space, has good cooling and power consumption."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The product is quite stable. Its performance is reliable."
"Uptime and service are valuable for us. When we have an issue, uptime and being able to get an emergency replacement or actual service is the most important thing for us."
"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."
"It is not expensive."
"HTML5 interface is a much needed improvement over the old Java interface, but still needs a little work."
"The UCS manager interface needs to be cleaned up a bit and can be streamlined, but no major complaints."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved and made cheaper."
"The price of this product is too high. They should work to make it more affordable."
"The solution’s technical support could be better."
"The high price of the solution is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The license is expensive. Cisco should decrease the delay in the delivery of their products."
"It needs a better UI. Cisco makes a great product, but doesn't know how to make a UI."
"Storage capacity could be enhanced."
"OA updates and upgrades have to be made simpler."
"The servers are a little bit huge, so it would be great if they could renew the size."
"The solution could improve by having more automation, such as the automatic mapping feature that is available in the Synergy Blade series."
"BladeSystem is an old-fashioned server and not very well developed for new features and new areas of data centers, which is not very good for enterprise companies."
"Higher bandwidth interconnects could be introduced."
"There is always room for improvement everywhere with the HPE BladeSystem."
"HPE BladeSystem can improve by providing the latest generation processor engine, such as the I-Flex processor."
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 and HPE Superdome X. 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.