We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS B-Series and HPE Integrity 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."Stateless Blade is the best feature."
"In terms of the flexibility of the tool to adapt to technology needs, I think it is a very good solution."
"I like that it's very manageable very easy to use and configure. I am not an expert, but the graphic user interface is quite simple very easy to use. It's a complete solution."
"The Dual Fabric design allows for online/in-service upgrades during production with no impact."
"The feature that I found the most value is the abstract and stateless capacities."
"The solution's most valuable feature is KVM Launch Manager."
"The ratio in terms of the number of units and the number of servers that we can get each chassis is quite good."
"From a return on investment perspective, Cisco UCS B-Series is worth the money."
"It is very fast and easy to use."
"The product's most valuable features are troubleshooting and monitoring."
"HPE Integrity is a reliable solution, but you'll need to refurbish the hardware because it's approaching the end of sale."
"The benefit provided by the solution for my organization stems from the fact that it provides maximum reliability and availability to users."
"We have what is called a chief data care center support. This is the highest level of support they have. We have been very happy with the support we have received."
"What I like about HPE Integrity servers is how stable and easy to use they are."
"The tool provides good performance and productivity."
"The product could be made more secure."
"The integration is an area where Cisco UCS B-Series needs to provide users with more details."
"The management interface needs a lot of improvement. As it is right now, it's a pain to use. It's not user-friendly."
"Cisco could improve the user-friendliness for less experienced users."
"The solution is difficult to set up."
"The monitoring features and integration with other products can be improved."
"HTML5 interface is a much needed improvement over the old Java interface, but still needs a little work."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved and made cheaper."
"The manageability must be improved."
"HPE Integrity has always been one step behind in areas like virtualization technologies, cloud enablement, the speed of backups, and replication."
"Unlike other platforms, it lacks easy integration with popular cloud services like Office 365."
"HPE Integrity is a pain. HPE hasn't put much work into developing the solution in the past few years because it will be discontinued soon."
"The monitoring is an area that needs some improvement."
"HPE Integrity needs improvement in terms of pricing for scalability."
"The virtualization of HPE Integrity could be simplified. We have discussed this issue with HPE and hopefully, they will have an update."
Cisco UCS B-Series is ranked 3rd in Blade Servers with 64 reviews while HPE Integrity is ranked 7th in Blade Servers with 19 reviews. Cisco UCS B-Series is rated 8.6, while HPE Integrity is rated 8.4. 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 Integrity writes "Highly stable, straightforward, and easy to use". Cisco UCS B-Series is most compared with HPE Synergy, Dell PowerEdge M, HPE BladeSystem, Super Micro SuperBlade and Pure Storage FlashBlade, whereas HPE Integrity is most compared with Super Micro SuperBlade, HPE Superdome X and HPE Synergy. See our Cisco UCS B-Series vs. HPE Integrity 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.
