We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS B-Series and Pure Storage FlashBlade based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco, Dell Technologies and others in Blade Servers."The solution is very unified and the technical team is very supportive, no help is needed from outside vendors."
"I like that the hardware is separated from the software definition of the components."
"The solution's most valuable feature is KVM Launch Manager."
"The Dual Fabric design allows for online/in-service upgrades during production with no impact."
"Cisco UCS B-Series is scalable."
"It is a very robust and reliable solution."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the service profile."
"The platform has valuable features for management and good monitoring tools. It provides efficient insights."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is performance."
"What I like best about Pure Storage FlashBlade is its object storage functionality, plus it has fast underlying hardware. Pure Storage FlashBlade is also very stable. I find its stability one of its valuable features."
"We have seen a reduction in the total cost of ownership by around 20%."
"It has absolutely simplified our storage because the dashboards on the consoles show a clear understanding of where you are, and it is also very easy to provision. This been a big help for our teams."
"The main feature I have found to be product replication."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its fast performance, especially in handling snapshots. It helps during power outages when we need to quickly move data between different data centers. It ensures efficient replication and helps maintain our data centers' uptime."
"The most valuable features include the ease of implementation, ease of use and the speed that you can do backup and recovery on."
"The tool's most valuable features are data warehousing, speedy recovery, and analytics. Its latest release is cost-effective."
"There are some shortcomings in the product when you look at it from the perspective of the area involving multiple configurations, making it an aspect where improvements are required."
"The high price of the solution is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"There is a delay in the product's reporting and the rebooting system compared to servers from other vendors."
"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."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
"The UCS manager interface needs to be cleaned up a bit and can be streamlined, but no major complaints."
"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 solution is expensive."
"They need better integration with public clouds along with a better hybrid solution."
"On our dedupe during our initial buy, we were expecting a number a little higher like 4x. However, we are getting about 3.6. While it is close enough, it doesn't quite hit the numbers. So, this has been a challenge."
"It would be nice if you could store file-based in the same box with the same technology."
"It's on the expensive side, as expected for a niche product."
"The features provided for SMB customers are limited."
"Pure Storage FlashBlade should improve on more cloud integration."
"File storage needs a lot of improvement. Mainframe connectivity also needs improvement because it requires additional components to be integrated with Pure Storage FlashBlade. If you want to keep your backup data, then this becomes an even more expensive solution because Pure Storage FlashBlade will not be able to meet your backup needs."
"The Pure Storage Orchestrator is our biggest pain point at the moment. If we can have more say in future developments of feature sets that we will need to support for our use case, that would be pretty beneficial to us."
Cisco UCS B-Series is ranked 3rd in Blade Servers with 64 reviews while Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 7th in File and Object Storage with 31 reviews. Cisco UCS B-Series is rated 8.6, while Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.8. 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 Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "A high-performing and scalable solution that improves data performance for S3 workloads". Cisco UCS B-Series is most compared with HPE Synergy, Dell PowerEdge M, HPE BladeSystem, Super Micro SuperBlade and Lenovo Flex System, whereas Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), VAST Data, MinIO, Pure Storage FlashArray and Red Hat Ceph Storage.
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.
