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 product's tech support has good people."
"The feature that I found the most value is the abstract and stateless capacities."
"The most valuable feature is the service profile."
"The initial setup is pretty simple and straightforward."
"Stateless Blade is the best feature."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is easily scalable."
"The most valuable features are monitoring and processing, which can handle a lot of throughput and are more powerful than the HPE series."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of management with the hardware."
"No issues with scalability. We can scale by adding another enclosure."
"I really appreciate the integrated Onboard Administrator, the iLO (Integrated Lights-Out) modular network, and the SAN Switches."
"One of the most valuable features I have found to be the enclosure. It is really easy to manage and everything is integrated. You are able to upgrade the software quite easily."
"I like the stability."
"It is a stable, dependable solution."
"For me, the most valuable features are integration and simple defining."
"The technical support is good."
"There is a delay in the product's reporting and the rebooting system compared to servers from other vendors."
"Its scalability could be better."
"The management interface needs a lot of improvement. As it is right now, it's a pain to use. It's not user-friendly."
"The graphic code that UCS can support is limited and less accessible than other systems."
"The configuration is a little bit complicated and could be made simpler."
"The configuration is a bit complex, as it requires very high technical expertise to apply it."
"The UCS manager interface needs to be cleaned up a bit and can be streamlined, but no major complaints."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
"They could include some embedded software for container technology."
"The servers are a little bit huge, so it would be great if they could renew the size."
"There could be more management capability to work with integrations."
"The integration and price of HPE BladeSystem could be improved."
"HPE has a replacement system called Synergy, though it’s a more high-end system than the old C7000."
"The connectivity speed could be improved."
"The price of the solution has room for improvement."
"I rate the stability of HPE BladeSystem a nine out of ten."
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.