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 Dual Fabric design allows for online/in-service upgrades during production with no impact."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to replace a server with another one, simply by applying the profile"
"The most valuable features of the solution are stability and security."
"The stability provided by the product is its most valuable feature for our organization."
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"The solution is stable...The solution is scalable."
"The solution is stable."
"Stateless Blade is the best feature."
"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."
"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."
"It is easy to scale if you have the licensing."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is its upgradability and centralized configuration."
"We are very happy with flexible NIC configuration features which are possible if you combine the BladeServers with HPE flex switches in the enclosures."
"The virtual connect and network management port is a valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature of the HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management."
"Next generation support for VMware needs to be introduced as it does not support eighth-generation VMware."
"Its scalability could be better."
"The UCS manager interface needs to be cleaned up a bit and can be streamlined, but no major complaints."
"It needs a better UI. Cisco makes a great product, but doesn't know how to make a UI."
"Cisco is expensive and difficult to manage. The product is not intuitive. It also needs to improve storage management and upgrades."
"We have to have Java to manage the infrastructure. It would be great if we can manage the infrastructure through a web browser."
"The graphic code that UCS can support is limited and less accessible than other systems."
"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 interface in terms of management could be much more intuitive."
"The connectivity speed could be improved."
"Some part of virtual connections needs improvement."
"Higher bandwidth interconnects could be introduced."
"If the hardware offered higher efficiency, that would be an ideal situation for our company."
"OA updates and upgrades have to be made simpler."
"It could always use new tools."
"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 62 reviews while HPE BladeSystem is ranked 2nd in Blade Servers with 133 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.