We performed a comparison between HPE Apollo and HPE Synergy based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Dell Technologies, Cisco and others in Density Optimized Servers."It enables us to implement software defined solutions very easily, because Apollo servers are certified for use with Linux systems"
"Absolutely being able to mount into Omni-Path architecture, HFIs on those nodes, because we were the very first site in the world"
"We're going to buy another Apollo 6500. We may configure it with half the number of GPUs because that may be all we need. In a sense, we can see the Apollo 6500 being so powerful that we only need half the GPU capability that we have now."
"Apollo Systems provide stuff that standard services do not. More HTDs, more compute power, at very reasonable pricing."
"It's very reliable. I haven't had a single failure at all in the year and a half; not the slightest problem with it."
"It's pretty flexible. You can choose how much storage you put on the server. You can have one to three nodes, depending on whether you want more CPU or storage."
"HPE Apollo's support is the most valuable feature."
"HPE Apollo's pricing is low, and implementation is very easy compared to other products."
"It has had a positive effect on the efficiency of our IT infrastructure team. The manageability of it is so easy, we're able to install it quickly, and replacement parts are easy to get in and out quickly."
"The solution help us to implement new business requirements quickly, since it is easy and quick to upgrade our capacity."
"It is a good product for hypervisors."
"I believe, compared to the C7000, it delivers a significant amount of innovation and flexibility,"
"It allows for easy management."
"It is a simple software to integrate with others."
"It gives us ease of use. It's nice because we don't have to mess with networking once it's set up. Once it's done, we just put another blade in and go from there. We don't have to go back in, run more cables, deal with more data center stuff. We stick a blade in, use the server profile template, build out a server profile from that, and it just goes."
"We bought it with the intent to replace the c7000 workstation blades. It is bigger than the workstation blades in core count, memory, and graphical capabilities. So, it has broadened us in that regard, and we have more capabilities."
"The solution's deployment, security, and scalability need improvement."
"We are quite happy with it, but its price and storage density can be better."
"Lustre seems to be just a little bit unstable overall."
"If there could be some training for our team, we would be better equipped to promote and support HPE Apollo."
"We have tried to used standardization using Ubuntu Linux and it's been hard. They had some difficulties getting the RAID configuration up and running because there are no drivers for it. It's not supported by HPE."
"There is a shared battery for all cache controllers in the node. When you have to replace that element, you have to take down all three nodes and not just one."
"We would like to see improved cooling because that is quite an issue. If you put that much compute power into a single rack, cooling really becomes an issue. And there is room for improvement there."
"We could, perhaps, use more GPUs in the future, go from eight to 16 GPUs per instance. That could run head-to-head against the DGX-1, the DGX-2 that NVIDIA has developed in their own chassis. That would be interesting to see."
"The expansion was complex, because adding a second frame onto the original frame caused an outage."
"The profiles aren't so easy to work with."
"The initial setup was complex. It was slow and just didn't work. Even HPE couldn't make it work for 45 days."
"One of the features I want to see, which I will see with OneView 5.0, is to have all the OneView consoles in a single pane of glass. That will make it easy to see everything in one place and not have to log in to multiple consoles."
"The installation and initial setup process is complex and needs to be improved."
"One of the things that I would like to see, and could be in their road map, is getting virtual connect to 100 Gig throughput."
"The performance could be better. The converged network cards initially didn't work. However, later on in the newer version, they came up with 50 GB network cards to replace the 20 GB ones, and it's perfectly fine now. At times, it could also be more stable."
"There is always room for improvement. Based on our use cases, I don't believe there are any additional features required."
HPE Apollo is ranked 1st in Density Optimized Servers with 22 reviews while HPE Synergy is ranked 1st in Blade Servers with 85 reviews. HPE Apollo is rated 8.4, while HPE Synergy is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of HPE Apollo writes "An affordable and easy-to-implement solution, but its after-sales support and technical support should be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE Synergy writes "Local hard drives are not needed for the i3S module that boots to any operating system". HPE Apollo is most compared with HPE ProLiant DL Servers, Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers, Dell PowerEdge FX, Dell PowerEdge XE Servers and IBM Power Systems, whereas HPE Synergy is most compared with HPE BladeSystem, Dell PowerEdge M, Cisco UCS B-Series, HPE Superdome X and HPE ProLiant DL Servers.
We monitor all Density Optimized 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.
