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."In terms of the flexibility of the tool to adapt to technology needs, I think it is a very good solution."
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"The scalability is very good."
"The initial setup is pretty simple and straightforward."
"I like that the hardware is separated from the software definition of the components."
"The stability provided by the product is its most valuable feature for our organization."
"The architecture of this solution is very valuable; it has five traffic interconnects, and uses a network highway so bandwidth is never an issue."
"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."
"No issues with scalability. We can scale by adding another enclosure."
"Modularity is a key feature that provides energy saving ."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management. It is easy to communicate from the server to the storage."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The product has a lot of options for checking servers and IoT ports using artificial intelligence."
"HPE BladeSystem is very easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of the HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management and the robust design."
"For me, the most valuable features are integration and simple defining."
"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."
"The pricing could be less."
"Compared to the deployment of servers such as Dell XCDs, the deployment of UCS servers is more complex. They take longer to deploy."
"HTML5 interface is a much needed improvement over the old Java interface, but still needs a little work."
"The UCS manager interface needs to be cleaned up a bit and can be streamlined, but no major complaints."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"There are patches that cannot be implemented without any downtime or reboot required."
"The configuration is a little bit complicated and could be made simpler."
"HPE BladeSystems is an old technology that cannot fit all of the dynamic organizational needs of our company."
"Storage capacity could be enhanced."
"HPE BladeSystem could improve the communication between the server and the storage."
"I would like to see the upgrade path a little bit smoother."
"Higher bandwidth interconnects could be introduced."
"If you compare it with Lenovo systems, the pricing is too high."
"They could include some embedded software for container technology."
"The response time in terms of getting technical support assistance could be improved."
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.