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."Some of the features I like from this solution are it has a fast configuration, it is not complex, and has high availability."
"The initial setup is pretty simple and straightforward."
"It is a very robust and reliable solution."
"The most beneficial feature is UCS Manager. It's the best way to manage hardware, creating group policies, like scrub policies and maintenance policies."
"It's modular."
"I can connect Cisco UCS B-Series to multiple chassis and rack servers using a unified platform, then manage them on a single console."
"It is less time-consuming to deploy the software."
"The Dual Fabric design allows for online/in-service upgrades during production with no impact."
"Basically, in a cluster, it works really nicely, especially within a cluster environment. Also, it's easily configurable."
"It also has a pretty solid design and management."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management. It is easy to communicate from the server to the storage."
"The product has a lot of options for checking servers and IoT ports using artificial intelligence."
"Virtual Fabric and interconnects are easy to configure and maintain."
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is simplified management."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"This has drastically reduced our datacenter space, has good cooling and power consumption."
"Right now, the market is rapidly transitioning to solid-state media and the Cisco options tend to be less varied and more expensive than a broader slate of products from HP, Dell or IBM."
"This model does not support virtualization of the switch."
"We have to have Java to manage the infrastructure. It would be great if we can manage the infrastructure through a web browser."
"HTML5 interface is a much needed improvement over the old Java interface, but still needs a little work."
"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 upgrades could be improved."
"The initial setup process is complex."
"Cisco could improve the user-friendliness for less experienced users."
"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."
"I would like to see the upgrade path a little bit smoother."
"I rate the stability of HPE BladeSystem a nine out of ten."
"Non-disruptive firmware upgrades in all areas of blade technology."
"Some part of virtual connections needs improvement."
"OA updates and upgrades have to be made simpler."
"They are not selling BladeSystem anymore. The end of the sale of this platform was this year, 2020."
"They should provide open learning materials and seminars for detailed knowledge of the product."
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.