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 stability provided by the product is its most valuable feature for our organization."
"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 platform has valuable features for management and good monitoring tools. It provides efficient insights."
"From a return on investment perspective, Cisco UCS B-Series is worth the money."
"Cisco UCS B-Series is scalable."
"In terms of the flexibility of the tool to adapt to technology needs, I think it is a very good solution."
"It is less time-consuming to deploy the software."
"The solution has the ability to reuse or divide the networking, making it a flexible networking environment."
"The solution is issue-free and works almost flawlessly."
"When it comes to the BladeSystem, what we love about it most is being able to actually manage it using OneView."
"It provides a secure access to the console and reliable administration."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its high availability."
"I have noticed that the solution does provide a very good ROI for companies."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"Wide choice in mixing SAN and LAN."
"USC Central seems a bit confusing for technicians."
"HTML5 interface is a much needed improvement over the old Java interface, but still needs a little work."
"The initial setup process is complex."
"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."
"This model does not support virtualization of the switch."
"The initial setup is not easy."
"The solution is expensive."
"The solution could improve by having more automation, such as the automatic mapping feature that is available in the Synergy Blade series."
"The support you get is dependant on the region. Some regions are better than others."
"The problem is that when want to expand with a new chassis, you have to do everything manually. It's not automatic."
"It is lacking in the ability to replicate virtual machines more easily."
"I'd like to see an all-in-one packet in the future."
"The management side of this solution could be improved."
"There could be more management capability to work with integrations."
"Some part of virtual connections needs improvement."
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.