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 most valuable features of the Cisco UCS B-Series are reports for virtualization and the large memory it has."
"I like that it's very manageable very easy to use and configure. I am not an expert, but the graphic user interface is quite simple very easy to use. It's a complete solution."
"Some of the features I like from this solution are it has a fast configuration, it is not complex, and has high availability."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the service profile."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is easily scalable."
"The solution is very unified and the technical team is very supportive, no help is needed from outside vendors."
"Stateless Blade is the best feature."
"The solution has the ability to reuse or divide the networking, making it a flexible networking environment."
"The solution uses a smaller space in our data centers. It uses less feeder and network cable, which reduces costs."
"The technical support is good."
"HPE BladeSystem provides good commuting performance."
"It is a stable, dependable solution."
"I like the stability."
"They are reliable, and they hardly break down. They are fast, and they serve us very well."
"Wide choice in mixing SAN and LAN."
"The scalability has been good."
"Its scalability could be better."
"Compared to the deployment of servers such as Dell XCDs, the deployment of UCS servers is more complex. They take longer to deploy."
"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."
"The solution is expensive."
"There are some shortcomings in the product when you look at it from the perspective of the area involving multiple configurations, making it an aspect where improvements are required."
"Cisco is expensive and difficult to manage. The product is not intuitive. It also needs to improve storage management and upgrades."
"Integration with storage could be improved."
"The scalability is limited because you only have a 16-server by chassis."
"It could always use new tools."
"It is lacking in the ability to replicate virtual machines more easily."
"Higher bandwidth interconnects could be introduced."
"There could be more management capability to work with integrations."
"The response time in terms of getting technical support assistance could be improved."
"They are not selling BladeSystem anymore. The end of the sale of this platform was this year, 2020."
"This product needs a wider range of firmware compatibility matrix from the oldest to the newest blade server."
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.