Oleksandr MeleshchukSystem Administrator at a manufacturing company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"It is stable and easy to manage."
"I would say the stability of the system itself would be the biggest advantage."
"The IMM tool is great because we can upgrade different views and device versions very quickly. We can upgrade everything from a single point through a single dashboard, which is great for us because we also have Lenovo storage. Lenovo ThinkSystem also has Xclarity built into the system."
"The solution is very simple to install."
"We appreciate the stability and easy mountings of all the machines. We have some direct connections with IBM, Lenovo, and other companies, and we get close support from them."
"It has good integration. You have VMware for connecting many machines, and you can support microservices. You can also easily connect the networks. It is also very easy to use and implement, and it comes with good support."
"Its performance and the local support of Lenovo in my city are the most valuable features. Its performance is the best, and its user interface is also very easy."
"I like everything about this solution. It is a very good server, with excellent availability. The size of the power is adequate and the low heating is beneficial."
"The shipment time can be improved. When we order Intel products, we have to wait for a long time. They can increase the local services and engineers in China. Local engineers will be able to know and understand customer problems much better."
"HP has a riser inside, but Lenovo does not have a riser. It would be good to have a riser with Lenovo. The GUI of the system is really bad. HP has a very good UI for smart memories and everything inside, but in Lenovo, we have a black-and-white UI. HP right now manufactures a server with scalable SP1 and SP2 on a single machine, which is not the case with Lenovo. They are changing the machine. For SP 1, there is one server, and for SP2, there is another server, which is really bad. In HP, we can use two models of processors in a single case. Lenovo should also be improved to have SP1 and SP2 scalable processors simultaneously on a single machine. They should not release another machine. This issue is also there in H3650 severs. They are all inside, but only V3 CPU or only v4 CPU can work, whereas, in HBG9, we can deploy V3 and V4 simultaneously. Lenovo also needs to advertise more because I can't see advertisements anywhere."
"From our side, our budgets are really not there. The availability of cash is a little bit limited. We buy as much as we can, If it was less expensive, we could buy more."
"It is quite an expensive product. Its price can be improved."
"It should have tools for integration with the cloud. We should be able to transmit data from our on-premises server to the servers in the cloud."
"Its price could be better. Its price is sometimes an issue for our clients. XClarity Controller is a very good feature, and Lenovo should include the XClarity Controller license without any additional cost. It should be integrated within the product."
"I would like the solution to be improved by having more advanced utilities."
"It is not expensive."
"Your budget determines the scalability."
"The licensing cost is the same as HP. It doesn't have any additional cost. However, the price, for example, for the memory option, does not match other vendors such as HP or Dell. They should work on the pricing of Lenovo. It is a great competitor, and it should compete with the price."
"It is too expensive. Because we are a university and we have to look for our money, many times we buy some refurbished machines or equipment at reasonable prices from IBM or Lenovo. We are a little bit limited in terms of money, and we buy as much as we can. If they were cheaper, we would buy more."
"It costs around $8,000. There is an additional cost for the support for a year."
"Its pricing is very competitive."
"The price of the solution is very expensive when compared to other solution like HP or Dell."
Storage is simple with the Intel Storage System JBOD2000 family, a 2U form factor system with support for twelve 3.5" LFF or twenty-four 2.5" SFF drives with a single or multi-cable connectivity. The JBOD2000 family includes redundant, hot-swap fans and the option for redundant, hot-swap power supplies. The JBOD2000S2 products support 6Gb/s SAS/SATA connectivity via industry-standard SFF-8088 connectors with the latest JBOD2000S3 version supports up to 12 Gb/s SAS connectivity via industry standard SFF-8644 connectors. All these JBOD offerings are designed to provide highly available and easily expandable storage for Intel servers at an affordable price point.
From growing small businesses to enterprise workloads, Lenovo rack servers offer the unmatched value, flexibility and industry-leading efficiency to meet mission-critical demands with legendary quality and reliability.
Intel Server System is ranked 9th in Rack Servers with 1 review while Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers is ranked 3rd in Rack Servers with 7 reviews. Intel Server System is rated 7.0, while Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Intel Server System writes "Stable and easy to manage, but needs better shipment time and local support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers writes "Provides the power and versatility needed to tackle demanding workloads". Intel Server System is most compared with Oracle SPARC Servers, IBM Power Systems, Dell EMC PowerEdge Rack Servers and HPE ProLiant DL Servers, whereas Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers is most compared with HPE ProLiant DL Servers, Dell EMC PowerEdge Rack Servers, IBM Power Systems, HPE Apollo and Dell EMC PowerEdge XE Servers.
See our list of best Rack Servers vendors.
We monitor all Rack 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.