We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS E-Series Servers and Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series 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 product is overall stable."
"They are really easy to maintain. I've added RAM to them. I've done a lot of other things with the virtualization."
"The Cisco chassis is very easy to configure and any network engineer or expert can configure the solution and easily integrate it with the chassis."
"The product's most valuable features are stability, speed, and scalability."
"The most valuable features are that they are efficient and easy to setup."
"Stability-wise, it is a good product that remains stable."
"Cisco has better visibility and manageability for disaster recovery."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its stability."
"Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series has two processors."
"The product should also be available in a standard edition or a standard license since currently there is a need to pay for an extra license, which is very expensive, especially when considering the budgeting part of our company."
"One thing that could be improved is the cost - it is very high for this Blade chassis as compared to other vendors. Especially in Asia. Asian customers mostly prefer a cost effective, cheaper solution."
"The tool must be made compatible with multi-vendor ecosystems."
"The biggest pain point for us is the matrix for the firmware upgrades. It is a pain. You look at that thing, you might as well be reading Greek. It would be a whole lot better if they could clean up their documentation on it."
"It is not a solution that is cloud ready."
"The platform's pricing needs improvement. There could be more collaborative tools included."
"The processing capacity could be improved."
"It can have more automation. In addition, Fujitsu should have a broader portfolio, not specifically in terms of the service solutions, but more in terms of the big picture. A broader portfolio would be nice for providing different solutions for the customers."
"The initial setup of Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series was complex."
More Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco UCS E-Series Servers is ranked 11th in Blade Servers with 7 reviews while Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series is ranked 13th in Blade Servers with 3 reviews. Cisco UCS E-Series Servers is rated 8.0, while Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS E-Series Servers writes "Easy to configure and operate". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series writes "A highly stable solution with technical support that is not only good but also always available to help the product's users". Cisco UCS E-Series Servers is most compared with Super Micro SuperBlade, whereas Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series is most compared with Fujitsu CX1000, Super Micro SuperBlade and HPE Synergy.
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.
