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 solution's most valuable feature is KVM Launch Manager."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the service profile."
"The scalability is very good."
"The architecture of this solution is very valuable; it has five traffic interconnects, and uses a network highway so bandwidth is never an issue."
"It is less time-consuming to deploy the software."
"Great security and functionality."
"The most valuable feature is the service profile."
"Since its UCS release in 2009, Cisco has extended the core functionality with Central, a tool for managing multiple domains"
"When it comes to the BladeSystem, what we love about it most is being able to actually manage it using OneView."
"Cabling complexity and volume have been reduced."
"Modularity is a key feature that provides energy saving ."
"The benefit is the density and the capability for global harmonization on the hardware, because all the hardware chassis are the same. We can also purchase the same network cards too, chassis by chassis, so it gives us a global solution."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is its upgradability and centralized configuration."
"The virtual connect and network management port is a valuable feature."
"The solution is issue-free and works almost flawlessly."
"The interface and dashboard are excellent and user-friendly."
"The upgrades could be improved."
"The integration is an area where Cisco UCS B-Series needs to provide users with more details."
"The pricing could be less."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved and made cheaper."
"Next generation support for VMware needs to be introduced as it does not support eighth-generation VMware."
"The main issue with this solution is that it is quite vendor-restricted, meaning that when we use third party software, we cannot use all of the available configuration tools or pre-validated design features."
"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."
"There could be more management capability to work with integrations."
"The connectivity speed could be improved."
"They could include some embedded software for container technology."
"I rate the stability of HPE BladeSystem a nine out of ten."
"The response time in terms of getting technical support assistance could be improved."
"The price of the solution has room for improvement."
"They are not selling BladeSystem anymore. The end of the sale of this platform was this year, 2020."
"It will be discontinued so we will have to change to another product shortly."
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.
