We performed a comparison between HPE Apollo and HPE ProLiant DL Servers based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Rack Servers solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The cost benefit of this solution is most valuable. It is quite effective for the work for which we are using it. We are mainly running video servers on these, and we are quite happy with the resilience, density storage, and streaming capacity of the system."
"we can use the same platform for several use cases: Hadoop, Ceph, and we are considering the server for another use case right now. It's a single solution, we only have to integrate it once and we can use it for several technologies."
"The solution is well documented in a data sheet."
"Apollo Systems provide stuff that standard services do not. More HTDs, more compute power, at very reasonable pricing."
"With HPE Apollo, we can propose configurations with many hard drives, making it suitable for large storage needs."
"Absolutely being able to mount into Omni-Path architecture, HFIs on those nodes, because we were the very first site in the world"
"It enables us to implement software defined solutions very easily, because Apollo servers are certified for use with Linux systems"
"We usually use three blades for two-rack units, and with enough storage, it's really a small system with a powerful CPU, powerful hard drives, powerful disks."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"When we need to, we can get through to technical support and get the right person."
"The setup was easy and not complicated."
"Stability is where HPE dominates competitors like Dell and Cisco. The servers are highly reliable, and we are impressed with the technology HPE offers."
"The solution's initial setup is straightforward."
"This product is feature-rich and is easy to install."
"It is very stable. This is the feedback that I'm getting from my customers for the hardware. It is also 100% scalable. HPE is also very specialized when it comes up to the server industry. It is not only about the rack servers; it is also about the blade servers. They were the first ones to bring these to the market more than ten years ago."
"One of the most valuable features is iLO, which is very good. Another thing is the HPE support is very good."
"The solution's deployment, security, and scalability need improvement."
"What's coming out in Gen 10 is very strong in terms of additional security."
"If there could be some training for our team, we would be better equipped to promote and support HPE Apollo."
"We could, perhaps, use more GPUs in the future, go from eight to 16 GPUs per instance. That could run head-to-head against the DGX-1, the DGX-2 that NVIDIA has developed in their own chassis. That would be interesting to see."
"The predictive analysis feature could be improved."
"Lustre seems to be just a little bit unstable overall."
"We would like to see improved cooling because that is quite an issue. If you put that much compute power into a single rack, cooling really becomes an issue. And there is room for improvement there."
"One drawback which I had: When I needed to expand storage on the Apollo, I had significant problems getting disks for it. It was a very long wait-time. So, if I were to give any advice in regards to improving this product, I would say make more of the 8TB disks available quicker."
"The solution could improve by providing more best practices from an architectural point of view. What are some recommended configurations for use, such as in a VM environment? HP provides some best practices but they are based on VMware, not on Red Hat. It would benefit for others to see the different use cases. How the HPE ProLiant DL Servers were used in the context of Red hat virtualization, and some configurations as an example to allow us to identify some points that we can improve in our platform. We could make our system more reliable and scalable."
"If they could put a SAN storage or resend it in the same product, it would be very helpful and more powerful."
"The technical support could be a little faster."
"They should improve the solution's built-in quality."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"The scalability of Gen8 models should be improved. They can also improve its price."
"The pricing of the solution is high compared to other products."
"In terms of what could be improved, if I could have faster processors with less cores, that would be good."
HPE Apollo is ranked 6th in Rack Servers with 22 reviews while HPE ProLiant DL Servers is ranked 2nd in Rack Servers with 156 reviews. HPE Apollo is rated 8.4, while HPE ProLiant DL Servers is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of HPE Apollo writes "An affordable and easy-to-implement solution, but its after-sales support and technical support should be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE ProLiant DL Servers writes "Good availability and management console with good reliability". HPE Apollo is most compared with Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers, HPE Synergy, Dell PowerEdge FX, Dell PowerEdge XE Servers and IBM Power Systems, whereas HPE ProLiant DL Servers is most compared with Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers, Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers, Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers, IBM Power Systems and Huawei FusionServer RH Series Rack Servers. See our HPE Apollo vs. HPE ProLiant DL Servers report.
See our list of best Rack Servers vendors.
We monitor all Rack 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.
What services do you want to serve on your servers?
It's very dependent on your answer, is it maximum ten disks Ok for you (DL360) or you want more? Do you need many PCIe slots?
It depends on what you actually need to do. Apollo servers are designed for significantly more disk density. If these are hypervisor hosts, the DL360s will generally be more useful. If these are standalone servers running single applications that require a lot of storage (for example, a Veeam backup server), the Apollo servers would be better.
I didn't work with Apollo but as far as I read about it and as others said, it depends on your purpose.
Apollo's approach is node computing for high-performance computing and graphic purposes and cost more than Proliant servers. And if you need more disk on your server (locally), I recommend disk enclosures as in this way you save a lot of money than purchasing a higher grade server.