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."
"It is less time-consuming to deploy the software."
"The feature that I found the most value is the abstract and stateless capacities."
"Stateless Blade is the best feature."
"The solution is stable...The solution is scalable."
"The product is easy to use."
"The ratio in terms of the number of units and the number of servers that we can get each chassis is quite good."
"The initial setup is simple, and not very complex."
"I have noticed that the solution does provide a very good ROI for companies."
"Remote management features are valuable."
"The solution uses less cabling and less space in the data center."
"The density of the BladeSystem, that we can keep adding blades as we need more VMs."
"For me, the most valuable features are integration and simple defining."
"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."
"They have served different needs for us from virtualized web servers to dedicated databases and application servers."
"It is not expensive."
"The cost is expensive and has room for improvement."
"The high price of the solution is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The solution’s technical support could be better."
"The solution is difficult to set up."
"This model does not support virtualization of the switch."
"Cisco UCS B-Series competitors have similar features as they do, Cisco needs to make some changes to make their offering better."
"The solution is expensive."
"For future improvements, it would be a benefit if the solution could integrate better with products such as Oracle."
"We sometimes have compatibility issues depending on the browser that you are using. For example, sometimes you have to switch between Edge, Mozilla, Internet Explorer, or Chrome to have things operating correctly."
"The integration and price of HPE BladeSystem could be improved."
"HPE BladeSystem can improve by providing the latest generation processor engine, such as the I-Flex processor."
"The only side that must be improved is the active-passive interconnect module architecture."
"I would like to see the upgrade path a little bit smoother."
"They should provide open learning materials and seminars for detailed knowledge of the product."
"It would be nice if the solution were cheaper."
"Storage capacity could be enhanced."
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.