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."Since its UCS release in 2009, Cisco has extended the core functionality with Central, a tool for managing multiple domains"
"Some of the features I like from this solution are it has a fast configuration, it is not complex, and has high availability."
"The Dual Fabric design allows for online/in-service upgrades during production with no impact."
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"The solution is stable."
"From a return on investment perspective, Cisco UCS B-Series is worth the money."
"The most valuable features are monitoring and processing, which can handle a lot of throughput and are more powerful than the HPE series."
"The most valuable features of the Cisco UCS B-Series are reports for virtualization and the large memory it has."
"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."
"Modularity is a key feature that provides energy saving ."
"The product has been simple to set up."
"The most valuable feature, of course, is its size as I can build a huge compute resource on it."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of management with the hardware."
"The solution has good performance."
"HPE BladeSystem is very easy to use."
"Its scalability could be better."
"It needs a better UI. Cisco makes a great product, but doesn't know how to make a UI."
"We have to have Java to manage the infrastructure. It would be great if we can manage the infrastructure through a web browser."
"The configuration is a little bit complicated and could be made simpler."
"USC Central seems a bit confusing for technicians."
"The graphic code that UCS can support is limited and less accessible than other systems."
"The initial setup process is complex."
"The solution’s technical support could be better."
"I am not sure if iLO is included or if there is a separate license. If it is not included, it should be included in the license. It is such a valuable feature especially because people are working remotely."
"If you compare it with Lenovo systems, the pricing is too high."
"The only side that must be improved is the active-passive interconnect module architecture."
"The problem is that when want to expand with a new chassis, you have to do everything manually. It's not automatic."
"It may be coming to its end of life."
"HPE BladeSystem can improve proactive monitoring."
"I'd like to see an all-in-one packet in the future."
"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 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.
