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 Dashboard is quite impressive and is, so far, the best based on my experience."
"Cisco UCS B-Series is scalable."
"The most beneficial feature is UCS Manager. It's the best way to manage hardware, creating group policies, like scrub policies and maintenance policies."
"The product is easy to use."
"The initial setup is simple, and not very complex."
"The ratio in terms of the number of units and the number of servers that we can get each chassis is quite good."
"The most valuable features of the Cisco UCS B-Series are reports for virtualization and the large memory it has."
"The hardware is easily swappable and, utilizing the boot from SAN option, you can always keep your server intact due to the service profiles."
"The solution has good performance."
"I really appreciate the integrated Onboard Administrator, the iLO (Integrated Lights-Out) modular network, and the SAN Switches."
"They are very fast and very reliable. They are working under very tough conditions."
"Its ease of management, consolidation, connectivity, power, and cooling are the most valuable features."
"HPE BladeSystem provides good commuting performance."
"The benefit is the density and the capability for global harmonization on the hardware, because all the hardware chassis are the same. We can also purchase the same network cards too, chassis by chassis, so it gives us a global solution."
"Cabling complexity and volume have been reduced."
"Wide choice in mixing SAN and LAN."
"HTML5 interface is a much needed improvement over the old Java interface, but still needs a little work."
"Integration with storage could be improved."
"The integration is an area where Cisco UCS B-Series needs to provide users with more details."
"USC Central seems a bit confusing for technicians."
"Compared to the deployment of servers such as Dell XCDs, the deployment of UCS servers is more complex. They take longer to deploy."
"The upgrades could be improved."
"The initial setup process is complex."
"The solution’s technical support could be better."
"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."
"This product needs a wider range of firmware compatibility matrix from the oldest to the newest blade server."
"I would like OneView to go over the current limit of 40 instances."
"There could be more management capability to work with integrations."
"The integration and price of HPE BladeSystem could be improved."
"The support you get is dependant on the region. Some regions are better than others."
"The scalability is limited because you only have a 16-server by chassis."
"It may be coming to its end of life."
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.