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 very reliable in comparison to the other brands."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to replace a server with another one, simply by applying the profile"
"The most valuable feature is the service profile."
"In terms of the flexibility of the tool to adapt to technology needs, I think it is a very good solution."
"The platform has valuable features for management and good monitoring tools. It provides efficient insights."
"Stateless Blade is the best feature."
"The solution's most valuable feature is KVM Launch Manager."
"The stability provided by the product is its most valuable feature for our organization."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is its upgradability and centralized configuration."
"It is not expensive."
"The solution has high performance."
"The density of the BladeSystem, that we can keep adding blades as we need more VMs."
"HPE BladeSystem is very easy to use."
"Remote management features are valuable."
"Basically, in a cluster, it works really nicely, especially within a cluster environment. Also, it's easily configurable."
"They are reliable, and it's relatively easy to manage them. They also regularly provide patching for the servers."
"The GUI is not the greatest."
"The initial setup process is complex."
"HTML5 interface is a much needed improvement over the old Java interface, but still needs a little work."
"The configuration is a little bit complicated and could be made simpler."
"This model does not support virtualization of the switch."
"The product could be made more secure."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved and made cheaper."
"It is more expensive than the competitors."
"For me, the product is okay, but I would probably suggest improvement in their services or technical support. They need to work harder in the preventative maintenance of the system. They need to improve in terms of how quickly can we get attention and how quickly problems are resolved. Its price could also be lower."
"It is really stable, however the motherboard sometimes crashes."
"The interface in terms of management could be much more intuitive."
"The servers are a little bit huge, so it would be great if they could renew the size."
"It would be nice if the solution were cheaper."
"HPE BladeSystem could improve the communication between the server and the storage."
"The price of the solution has room for improvement."
"I would prefer to have changes in the compatibility of the blade servers with the new ones designed by HPE, as the top team's version does not have it."
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.