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."Great security and functionality."
"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 pretty simple and straightforward."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to replace a server with another one, simply by applying the profile"
"The scalability is good because it comes with Fabric Interconnects, and you can directly add more blades as you go. Therefore, scalability is not a problem."
"The Dashboard is quite impressive and is, so far, the best based on my experience."
"The solution is stable."
"I can connect Cisco UCS B-Series to multiple chassis and rack servers using a unified platform, then manage them on a single console."
"HPE BladeSystem is very easy to use."
"No issues with scalability. We can scale by adding another enclosure."
"The product is quite stable. Its performance is reliable."
"I have noticed that the solution does provide a very good ROI for companies."
"It is easy to scale if you have the licensing."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The solution is scalable, offering flexibility and expansion options to meet changing business needs."
"The most valuable feature, of course, is its size as I can build a huge compute resource on it."
"Compared to the deployment of servers such as Dell XCDs, the deployment of UCS servers is more complex. They take longer to deploy."
"This model does not support virtualization of the switch."
"The graphic code that UCS can support is limited and less accessible than other systems."
"Right now, the market is rapidly transitioning to solid-state media and the Cisco options tend to be less varied and more expensive than a broader slate of products from HP, Dell or IBM."
"USC Central seems a bit confusing for technicians."
"The management interface needs a lot of improvement. As it is right now, it's a pain to use. It's not user-friendly."
"The GUI is not the greatest."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"It would be nice if the solution were cheaper."
"Storage capacity could be enhanced."
"I would like OneView to go over the current limit of 40 instances."
"It is really stable, however the motherboard sometimes crashes."
"The tool must provide integration with the cloud."
"They could include some embedded software for container technology."
"HPE BladeSystem could improve the communication between the server and the storage."
"If the hardware offered higher efficiency, that would be an ideal situation for our company."
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.