Compare HPE BladeSystem vs. NEC Sigmablade-H

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
HPE BladeSystem Logo
5,456 views|4,319 comparisons
NEC Sigmablade-H Logo
39 views|14 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco, Dell EMC and others in Blade Servers. Updated: May 2021.
511,607 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:

Pricing and Cost Advice
"It is not expensive, really, in this class of server products.""It is expensive. There are no additional costs. We are able to get good discounts anyway from HPE, but if the price can come down, we'll be happy.""Its pricing was good. We selected this solution because it was within our budget. We paid just once when we bought it. We never bought any license."

More HPE BladeSystem Pricing and Cost Advice »

Information Not Available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Blade Servers solutions are best for your needs.
511,607 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The solution is very easy to use.
Top Answer: Its pricing was good. We selected this solution because it was within our budget. We paid just once when we bought it. We never bought any license.
Top Answer: It's an old-fashioned technology now. I'm not sure precisely what should be improved. I can't recall any missing features. If the hardware offered higher efficiency, that would be an ideal situation… more »
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Ranking
3rd
out of 23 in Blade Servers
Views
5,456
Comparisons
4,319
Reviews
7
Average Words per Review
452
Rating
8.4
22nd
out of 23 in Blade Servers
Views
39
Comparisons
14
Reviews
0
Average Words per Review
0
Rating
N/A
Popular Comparisons
Also Known As
HP ProLiant BL Series Servers, HP ProLiant BladeSystem, HP BladeSystem
Sigmablade-H
Learn More
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.

The NEC N8405-024F Blade Enclosure (SIGMABLADE-H) can integrate a maximum of 16 servers' functions into one blade enclosure by housing a maximum of 16 CPU blades and 8 pass-through cards or switch modules in a case of 10U (about 445mm). 

Offer
Learn more about HPE BladeSystem
Learn more about NEC Sigmablade-H
Sample Customers
EMIS Health
Miyakonojo City Council
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm21%
Government8%
Energy/Utilities Company8%
Insurance Company7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company28%
Comms Service Provider22%
Government9%
Financial Services Firm8%
No Data Available
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business11%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise68%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco, Dell EMC and others in Blade Servers. Updated: May 2021.
511,607 professionals have used our research since 2012.

HPE BladeSystem is ranked 3rd in Blade Servers with 10 reviews while NEC Sigmablade-H is ranked 22nd in Blade Servers. HPE BladeSystem is rated 8.4, while NEC Sigmablade-H is rated 0.0. The top reviewer of HPE BladeSystem writes "Easy to set up and offers good scalability with a small footprint". On the other hand, HPE BladeSystem is most compared with HPE Synergy, Cisco UCS B-Series, HPE Superdome X, Dell PowerEdge M and Lenovo Flex System, whereas NEC Sigmablade-H is most compared with .

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.