Compare HPE BladeSystem vs. Lenovo Flex System

HPE BladeSystem is ranked 2nd in Blade Servers with 14 reviews while Lenovo Flex System is ranked 7th in Blade Servers with 1 review. HPE BladeSystem is rated 8.4, while Lenovo Flex System is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of HPE BladeSystem writes "Gives us good server density and a harmonized hardware solution". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Lenovo Flex System writes "We can now create machines easily without waiting to provide more hardware". HPE BladeSystem is most compared with HPE Synergy, Cisco UCS B-Series and HPE Superdome X, whereas Lenovo Flex System is most compared with HPE Synergy, HPE Superdome X and Cisco UCS B-Series.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco UCS B-Series vs. HPE BladeSystem and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
372,185 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
With just one cable, for redundancy let's say two, you can feed sixteen servers in a single c7000 chassis.The virtual connect and network management port is a valuable feature.The benefit is the density and the capability for global harmonization on the hardware, because all the hardware chassis are the same. We can also purchase the same network cards too, chassis by chassis, so it gives us a global solution.They have served different needs for us from virtualized web servers to dedicated databases and application servers.They are reliable, and it's relatively easy to manage them. They also regularly provide patching for the servers.I really appreciate the integrated Onboard Administrator, the iLO (Integrated Lights-Out) modular network, and the SAN Switches.Virtual Fabric and interconnects are easy to configure and maintain.Wide choice in mixing SAN and LAN.

Read more »

The stability and speed are always good. The processor is good and it's still working with our loads.

Read more »

Cons
The only side that must be improved is the active-passive interconnect module architecture.HPE BladeSystems is an old technology that cannot fit all of the dynamic organizational needs of our company.The scalability is limited because you only have a 16-server by chassis.There have been some hardware failures with them. These failures have since been solved by HPE support partners.The problem is that when want to expand with a new chassis, you have to do everything manually. It's not automatic.This product needs a wider range of firmware compatibility matrix from the oldest to the newest blade server.​Storage capacity could be enhanced.Higher bandwidth interconnects could be introduced.

Read more »

The user-interface needs improvement, because they have an application from which we have to manage the whole system and all the infrastructure. This application is not working at our premises, because of some problem with the hardware itself. So although we brought it with our systems, and we used it to manage all the systems: the storage, the switches, and everything, nevertheless we have to support every part alone and enter the interface in one-by-one.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
The chassis itself, with no blade server inside, so expensive. The C7000 model costs around $100,000.​The price could be cheaper.

Read more »

We have the whole maintenance for the 3 years, starting the deployment. We also have the VMware license for 3 years and I think we have another license to buy. There are no additional costs besides licensing.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Blade Servers solutions are best for your needs.
372,185 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
2nd
out of 25 in Blade Servers
Views
6,518
Comparisons
4,244
Reviews
14
Average Words per Review
289
Avg. Rating
8.4
7th
out of 25 in Blade Servers
Views
563
Comparisons
386
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
1,084
Avg. Rating
8.0
Top Comparisons
Compared 82% of the time.
Compared 3% of the time.
Compared 52% of the time.
Also Known As
HP ProLiant BL Series Servers, HP ProLiant BladeSystem, HP BladeSystem
Learn
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
Lenovo
Overview
HP ProLiant BladeSystem share power, cooling, network, and storage infrastructure via the blade enclosure. Since equipment is not needed for each server, you get a dramatic reduction in power distribution units, power cables, LAN and SAN switches, connectors, adapters, and cables. And you can add the newest-generation technologies by simply changing individual components.

Flex System is Lenovo’s proven, 2nd generation blade, that efficiently runs your infrastructure applications with up to 80% better density than standard rack server deployments.

Offer
Learn more about HPE BladeSystem
Learn more about Lenovo Flex System
Sample Customers
EMIS Health
Information Not Available
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm20%
Government8%
Energy/Utilities Company7%
Insurance Company7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company27%
Manufacturing Company21%
Comms Service Provider13%
Government9%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco UCS B-Series vs. HPE BladeSystem and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
372,185 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email