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.
"I like that the hardware is separated from the software definition of the components."
"The initial setup is pretty simple and straightforward."
"The GUI makes is simple to use and deploy."
"It is a very robust and reliable solution."
"The Dashboard is quite impressive and is, so far, the best based on my experience."
"The solution is stable."
"The feature that I found the most value is the abstract and stateless capacities."
"The initial setup is simple, and not very complex."
"The solution has good performance."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of management with the hardware."
"HPE BladeSystem provides good commuting performance."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is simplified management."
"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."
"The scalability has been good."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management. It is easy to communicate from the server to the storage."
"Basically, in a cluster, it works really nicely, especially within a cluster environment. Also, it's easily configurable."
"The upgrades could be improved."
"It is more expensive than the competitors."
"The cost is expensive and has room for improvement."
"The monitoring features and integration with other products can be improved."
"It needs a better UI. Cisco makes a great product, but doesn't know how to make a UI."
"The configuration is a bit complex, as it requires very high technical expertise to apply it."
"The license is expensive. Cisco should decrease the delay in the delivery of their products."
"The solution is difficult to set up."
"HPE BladeSystem can improve proactive monitoring."
"The servers are a little bit huge, so it would be great if they could renew the size."
"Storage capacity could be enhanced."
"HPE BladeSystems is an old technology that cannot fit all of the dynamic organizational needs of our company."
"The price of the solution has room for improvement."
"The latest version of this system is called Synergy from HPE, and it comes with more advanced features. This is currently the most advanced solution available in the market. One of its key features is its energy efficiency, which optimizes energy usage."
"I rate the stability of HPE BladeSystem a nine out of ten."
"BladeSystem is an old-fashioned server and not very well developed for new features and new areas of data centers, which is not very good for enterprise companies."
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.
