We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS Manager and HPE OneView based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Cisco UCS has different layers of security, and you can do multiple installations of your LIAMs on top of the server and Blade. You can install VMware, Windows Server, Hyper-V, etc."
"The most valuable features are flexibility and management."
"We can configure the Cisco UCS Manager, the profiles and interactions with the resource we manage."
"The management is one of the most valuable features of this solution."
"The solution is highly scalable, mainly because of the templates that make it easy for you to actually edit on the system."
"From a usability and functionality perspective, Cisco UCS Manager is very good."
"I can quickly manage the provisioned servers."
"The interface is ergonomic and native. We can use UCS Manager to do all the configurations for the servers, including storage, networking, and all the other components we need inside the fabric. It's simple and flexible."
"By being able to deploy servers very quickly and rapidly, we can respond to any business requirement needed."
"Just the ability to provision the servers with storage and network everything within one interface, not having to go into multiple interfaces to provision those pieces."
"Firmware compliance is one of the most valuable features."
"The easy user interface was what I found most valuable in HPE OneView. For example, if I wanted to know the infrastructure status or I needed to send in any change commands, HPE OneView had simple buttons."
"Have a single plane of glass across all of the server platforms."
"We lose less time managing the machines."
"I don't have to use CD-ROMs or anything like that to provision the servers."
"The solution's initial setup process was easy...The technical support is good...It is a stable product, and we will use it for a long time."
"The solution's pricing is high and could be reduced."
"The interface and the way it is constructed is very complex. They should work to simplify it. It's quite difficult for somebody who doesn't know the product very well. Users should be able to get proficient with it faster. There's definitely room for improvement there."
"Cisco UCS is expensive compared to others. The Cisco UCS Chassis is more expensive than a standalone server, but some companies require standalone servers because of their production load and affordability. You need to pay more if you require more features on the Blade or if you need more ports on the switch."
"Cisco UCS Manager should have a simplified deployment in the sense of not having multiple machines, demilitarized zones, and on-premise options."
"The installation and upgrade sytems need to be improved."
"In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to their security."
"We have three data centers and if we could manage all three data centers using one interface, it would be great."
"I found it a bit of a challenge to get training on UCSM. I've been trying to get that for some time now. I feel like I have to figure it out a lot of things myself. For years I've to log calls with support whenever I've got challenges that I cannot resolve. If I had some training or more manuals, I'd be better able to handle more things on my own."
"The solution could add storage, integration services, and end-to-end support for Cisco switches or other competitor products."
"It's a little slow sometimes. Overall, I think it does what it's supposed to do. I think that as they evolve it, it'll get quicker."
"I had some minor difficulties with upgrading, but the solution still works fine."
"It needs more reporting capabilities."
"Technical support is not very good. The engineers do not know a lot about the product, even when asked simplistic questions."
"The solution's console can be improved by making it more user-friendly and adding the capability to filter the reports out using only the information required."
"The tool doesn't send automated alerts via email...We should be able to receive notification emails when a server or hardware issue arises, which would be helpful if someone is unavailable in the office."
"We've had a few issues. We just upgraded to the 3.9.0 version. We think that now that we are on that version, hopefully a lot of those things are going to go away for us."
Cisco UCS Manager is ranked 29th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 21 reviews while HPE OneView is ranked 17th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 80 reviews. Cisco UCS Manager is rated 8.0, while HPE OneView is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS Manager writes "Used to manage servers, monitor or manage firmware upgrades, and push policies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE OneView writes "Provides firmware compliance and the ability to connect to iPO". Cisco UCS Manager is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Nutanix Prism, Zabbix, Datadog and Moogsoft, whereas HPE OneView is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Dell CloudIQ, Zabbix, Lenovo XClarity Orchestrator and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our Cisco UCS Manager vs. HPE OneView report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.
