Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers Reviews

Its hardware is really reliable. We also like Cisco for its support.

Its accessibility and manageability can be improved. Currently, we have to visit the office to manage it. It should be manageable outside our network. I would like it to be on the cloud.

I have been using this solution for almost three years.

It is stable.

It is scalable. We have around 200 users.

Their technical support is good. Their response time is also good. I don't have any problem with their support.

We were using HP ProLiant. After migrating to the Cisco network, we are using Cisco products. For our server also, we preferred Cisco.

The vendor installed the product. The vendor and our system administrator worked together. It took us three days to deploy. 

Cisco is expensive, but we didn't look at the cost of the product. We were looking at reliability and support.

I would definitely recommend this solution. When you hear the brand Cisco, you don't really need to recommend it. For me, it is the number one brand for network devices and servers. Cisco is always there in Gartner Magic Quadrant.

I would rate Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers a nine out of ten. They just need the ability to be managed on the cloud.

We use Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers for Cisco CallManager, and business application hosting.

The most valuable features of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers are agileness, ease of operation, and manageability.

Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers could improve integration with third-party solutions.

I have been using Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers for approximately 10 years.

Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers are stable.

The scalability of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is good.

Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers' basic installation and commissioning are easy.

We have a team that does the implementation of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers.

The prices of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers are higher compared to the competition. When we try and sell against the competition, then it becomes quite difficult to sell

Our clients have enjoyed the solutions.

I rate Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers an eight out of ten.

There is always room and scope for improvement.

The product's stability and delivery time could be better. 

I have been using the product for one month. 

The solution is scalable. My company has around 400 users for the product. 

The tool's deployment is not complex. It took around two to three days for the installation to complete. 

My company has an agreement with Cisco to get discounted rates. It is one of the reasons why we chose the product. 

I would rate the product a ten out of ten. 

I do not yet use the latest update, instead using the full solution which the client has. I use all versions of the solution. 

We make IT use of the solution, employing several types of servers, for management, virtualization or whatever may be the needs of the client. The solution comprises a server. I use a standalone server.

There is no one feature that I have found to be most useful. I utilize all the features of the solution which I require. 

The price of the solution is problematic, not the solution itself. It could be less expensive. 

I have been using Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers for around ten years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is easily scalable. 

I feel the technical support to be fine. I cannot think of anything needing improvement in this regard. I rate the support as an eight out of ten. 

The solution is easy to set up.

The solution could be more cost-effective. 

We had plans to use VMware and then Cisco Prime. 

I still use the solution, installing it and providing support for clients. 

The solution is not deployed in my organization, but in those of my clients. 

I can't think of any features which need to be added to the solution. All of them are good. 

I rate Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers as a nine out of ten. 

We are a system integrator and this is one of the products that we implement for our clients.

They are for general, mixed usage that includes use cases such as virtualization and hosting VMware.

The warranty and support periods should be extended. One of the things that we like about Dell and HPE is the longer duration of support.

What we would really like to see is more years of extended support. If somebody wants to extend it to five years or seven years, this should be possible because some of our customers really want it.

We have been working with this product for between five and six years.

This is a stable product and we plan to continue working with it in the future.

This product is scalable and is typically installed on-premises for customers who are small to medium-sized businesses. We have dozens of clients who use it.

Technical support is good and we don't have a problem with it, although they have a shorter support cycle for their products.

We work with several vendors including Dell and HPE. When it comes to Dell, the warranty period is generally longer compared to Cisco.

The initial setup is straightforward and easy to do. It is not complex at all.

It does not take much time to deploy.

Our in-house team deploys this solution to our customers. Not many people are required for deployment. Two people might be used for racking and stacking, and one person for the configuration.

This product is slightly more expensive when compared to others.

We do not deal with the latest version because we find that for rack servers, the previous version is a little better. Manageability is not a big option for this type of server.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our customers' primary use case is for hosting virtual machines. It could be a white solution. It could be service, and it could be their applications.

The first advantage of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is that you don't need to buy physical hardware like I used to have to do for each application. It is just software or operating systems. Now you have to buy one physical server which will host multiple virtual machines. It saves a lot on space, power, and management. If you're installing a VMware ESXi server on the UCS servers, the central servers are not there. So if you're using a V-Center ESXi server with multiple servers, you can manage the VMs plus you can have stand by storage in case one of them goes down.

It depends on your mission. We've started working on the other UC servers so there is no hardware dependency. If something goes, you can retrieve it from other servers so downtimes are minimized and the failure gets fixed fast, within minutes. Then you have a backup option. You can take a backup virtual machine. In case you install some patches or something that causes a server to go down, you can install it from the backups.

In terms of the features that I have found most valuable, that is the hardware, which is more dynamic. Cisco has the channels for the people to buy it. It has the red configurations, you can have more RAM and their CPUs have more code, depending on what kind of server you have, because there are three or four variations. So those options are available. Most of the customers we deal with have a smaller setting, like a voice solution. So they want the Cisco Call Manager. They go for the C 220 version, where they can employ two or three servers and two or three virtual machines, not the physical server. And they can get their voice setup working. If the customer is looking for more servers and more options, they go for more hardware, and a higher version of that server, such as 220, 240, and the like.

In terms of what could be improved, they could add their SSD drives instead of the normal, disc drives. That's the one thing.

I have worked on both UC C-Series and E-Series servers. I used  E-Series servers when I was employed in Cisco. I worked on UC Series servers while I was managing the data center NetOne, which is located in Zambia, Africa.

In total I have worked on Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers for four years.

In terms of stability, I think it's mostly stable. The only thing I found as I started this phase is that you just need to wait for the replacement from Cisco, if you have the support for that server. Apart from that, I don't see any problems with the hardware on the E-Series and C-Series. Most of the cases with hardware or some software issues, the customer doesn't have the Smart Net account to get it fixed. That's why it gets delayed.

I remember one issue with the UC C-Series which I was troubleshooting last year when the software upgrade on one module in the E-Series for the phone had some problem. It was looping and kept on booting and the customer didn't have any support. It was difficult to resolve that issue.

Otherwise, I don't find many problems. I don't think we need many people managing it. There are no day-to-day issues with the physical hardware. The physical hardware barely has any problems throughout the year. Maybe once or twice. You may need to update the firmware for any bugs or any segregation of phones. Apart from that, I don't find any issues. Even if the power goes off it doesn't create any errors or any issues.

The E-Series' scalability is limited. In E-Series, it can be scaled up by adding additional blades, or you can buy another UC server. But with the C-Series, apart from available hardware space, you don't have many options to scale it.

I think the C-Series is 64GB or 120GB RAM and maybe two or three terabytes for processors. That's what I remember right now. The one server can support that. If you have more, you have capacity issues, and then you have to buy another server.

Yes, I have used Smart Net. But I have rarely reported an issue with them.

I think nowadays Cisco tech support is not that good.

Sometimes you receive different solutions from different people. If they are not on the same page, if you're working with one tech engineer and they have gone off shift and you get another tech engineer, he may give you different answers or different solutions than what the previous engineer was talking about. But this is not specific to the UCS, but a general issue with Cisco retail work and open stack cases. I found them inconsistent.

The first time you're doing the setup it is a little complex. But the second time is much easier. So I don't find any issues.

In terms of the physical server, it doesn't need much because it comes packed with everything, including RAM and processors. In some cases it may come separately so you have to open the server and put the processor, Ram and hard disk into the server. That's the only thing. After this is done, you have to install the hypervisor. Then there is the application, the virtual machines and things that they take over.

One server should not take more than one or two hours if your rack has big enough space and you have the railings. It should not take much time for mounting and powering on.

I think the pricing is high. Cisco has to look for bundling this solutions with other applications. They could sell basic options of the UC server along with other Cisco products and software. That would work. But as a standalone product, the customer looks at the price and it means they may not buy it when they see other products with the same construction at a lower price.

I don't have any problems with the Cisco UC series. It serves its purpose.

I think their products are good. The only thing Cisco needs to work on is the cost part.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers an eight.

Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers have plenty of features and computing and memory power.

The hard drive of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is not very good. I have already replaced three of them.

I have been using Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers for approximately four years.

While using the Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers for a couple of months, one of my hard drive disks was failing and VM had issues. There was no reason for it to fail, the hard drive was full and I had to replace it. All the data on it can not be restored. They should make some improvements to their hard drives.

The solution could have better reliability and redundancy.

We have many people in my organization using Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers in the administration.

If we want to scale the solution we can add new nodes. It is scalable.

We have approximately 200 users using this solution in my organization.

I have used the support from our partner and we have had a good experience. They did not take very long to support me in my needs.

I would rate the support from the partner a four out of five.

We have a partner that does the maintenance and support of the solution.

The price of the solution could be better when compared to other solutions. However, when we purchased the solution we received Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers in a bundle with other hardware, such as IP phones and networking switches.

I would rate the price of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers to be a two out of five.

I have had the opportunity to evaluate Lenovo and VxRail.

 The solution has a very high-level computer and can be a benefit. I had some issues with hard drive failures but I believe the newer version is better.

I rate Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers a six out of ten.

We use Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers for general-purpose VMware. It's just tier-one applications. VMware ESXi, databases SQL, Oracle, and SAP, are the main use cases.

The performance has been good, but the biggest benefit has been the time saved. With Intersight management, I believe we can save half a headcount while still managing and configuring the servers.

In most cases, computes compute, and there isn't much differentiation, but one point of differentiation is Intersight cloud management.

Performance is good, as well as manageability.

The interface is good.

The only thing I would change is to provide more proactive support. I would like to try to shift away from reactive support and toward a more proactive support model. The alerting and the system beginning to alert us when it is outside of normal parameters is adequate, but I believe it can do more in terms of support.

I'm not sure if they do this at the moment, but I would like to see support for NVMe over Fabrics. NVMe over Fabric is used so that the entire solution can communicate NVMe over Fabric between the servers and the storage. It's doing exactly what we need right now, and the performance is excellent. But in two years, we'll be looking for the next thing.

I have been using Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers for two years.

Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is a very stable platform.

It is scalable, but only by adding more servers. We knew that when we bought it and when we sold it to the customer.

It can service approximately 500 users.

It is being used by a real estate agency, one of the largest in New Zealand. It is used throughout the business, by salespeople, which is where their primary real estate listings are placed. Everyone uses the system, from senior management to sales to HR. This is how they get their applications.

I'm currently using FlashStack. Flex fathers Cisco and NetApp, and FlashStack is Pure Storage and Cisco. Cisco is the vendor, and the server infrastructure is UCS Servers.

We have our engineers that install it.

We pre-stage some of the equipment before sending it to the site. it can take a day to install four or five servers. It's quite quick.

The infrastructure team consists of two people. It only took one person to deploy.

We sold the solution, and the customer was very pleased with it. We performed a total cost of ownership analysis, and the results were mixed, but it meets their return on investment.

Only Intersight licensing is required.

Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis, which is only $2,000 or $3,000. It's not too expensive. The Intersight licensing adds value, which the customer takes advantage of.

I would rate Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers a nine out of ten. It did what it said it would do. It was simple to install and has given us no problems.