HPE Synergy Reviews

My use case is to serve the complete IT environment of the telecom, including all cloud applications. I use HPE Synergy servers for my private cloud and for network management systems. 70% of my workload is running on HPE servers.

The integrated view, such as managing complete servers and virtualization from a single view, is very good. The composable feature is amazing as it helps avoid downtimes.

There is room for improvement in the efficiency part. The power consumption is very high, and there should be a more efficient way of reducing the power requirements while maintaining high performance.

I have been using HPE Synergy for four to five years.

The stability is very good. I would rate it a ten out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of the solution as nine out of ten.

The technical support from HPE is rated as nine out of ten.

Positive

I have seventy percent of HPE in my premises. I use Cisco UCaaS and Dell Poetics as well, however, the majority of my servers are from HPE. HPE offers a converged solution with high capacity and better server configurations compared to others.

The initial setup was complex due to the delivery part, however, the configuration and other aspects were good.

My deployment was done in-house, although I consulted with HPE resident engineers.

I have achieved a good ROI and have a strong relationship with HPE.

The pricing is relatively high compared to Cisco servers. However, due to the volume of my purchases, I get good discounts.

I highly recommend HPE Synergy to others. It is user-friendly, high-performing, and has good support. Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

Our customer initially deployed a blade system, which was later upgraded to the Synergy chassis. We transitioned the system and migrated our data, finding the experience straightforward and reliable. The decision to upgrade was driven by the aging of the previous system and the opportunity to implement a more robust virtualization solution with Synergy. The Synergy unit is connected to an HPE 3PAR storage, which remains unchanged and performs well.

The main benefit of HPE Synergy is that we can keep growing horizontally or vertically within one box or chassis. They have one unit, one chassis. With that, they have all they need to run, and if they need more blades, we can add them with available room. We use four slots for that.

The Image Streamer in HPE Synergy is an exceptional feature. It enables us to deploy images to the system and effortlessly manage them, greatly enhancing our solution. Additionally, the management software accompanying the system is remarkably reliable and user-friendly. This allows us to manage the Synergy unit seamlessly, connect to the storage network, and efficiently oversee our storage resources.

The hardware specs are impressive, and its flexibility for scalability is noteworthy. Based on our experience, it fulfills our needs efficiently. Implementing it has been straightforward without any significant configuration hassles. Perhaps the only suggestion would be to consider more frequent system updates.

I have been using HPE Synergy for seven years.

I rate the solution’s stability a ten out of ten.

The scalability of HPE Synergy is impressive. We can enhance our setup by adding a new Virtual Connect unit, enabling us to achieve one hundred gigabits. This capability ensures that we remain well-equipped even with units installed several years ago, like the one we have. Presently, we have ten gigabytes connected, but with the option to upgrade to a new Virtual Connect model, seamlessly replacing the existing one and increasing our capacity to one hundred gigabits, we can allow for continuous expansion.

We encountered an issue with an LCD indicator in the chassis, so we contacted support. We sent an email around 10 AM, and they responded at 10:30. They suggested some troubleshooting steps and asked us to run tests on the device. After sending them the test results, they approved the installation of a patch. We applied the patch, and that resolved the issue.

Positive

The initial setup is very easy. We deployed this in two days, including installation, system setup, firmware upgrades, configuration, and network connection. By the next day, we were already deploying virtual machines.

We initially began with the Blade system. As the migration to SAP HANA approached, it seemed prudent to upgrade our hardware. Consequently, we facilitated their transition from the Blade system to Synergy. Subsequently, we collaborated closely with the SAP consultancy company to oversee the migration process, ensuring seamless integration of all workloads and sub-environments.

We have four people working on the deployment, including a project manager, two specialists, and one tech support.

Synergy is a bit pricier. When we compared it with Dell during the migration to this Synergy unit, our client also sought quotes from another provider. Ultimately, although we were slightly more expensive, they chose to contract with us due to their reliability and positive experience with the blade system. Adjusting to a different brand would have posed a challenge due to the learning curve. Ultimately, we negotiated with our account manager to improve the pricing, aiming to align it more closely with Dell's offerings. Dell's pricing was competitive.

For example, if they had purchased separate servers before, they would have had to buy parts for each. With HPE Synergy, they concentrate on parts for just one chassis. Although it may be a bit more expensive upfront, in the end, the parts are more reliable than with individual servers and tend to last longer. When comparing the Synergy solution and their blade solution to their old separate server setup, they used to purchase more parts for the first solution they had before transitioning to a blade architecture.

For example, one significant aspect to consider is the financial impact on energy consumption. Since they are separate servers with individual power supplies, each consuming energy independently, there is an opportunity for optimization. In this case, HPE Synergy allows for sharing power supplies among multiple servers. For instance, this solution might utilize four power supplies to run four servers efficiently.

I 100% recommend this solution.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

The typical use case for HPE Synergy is mainly the requirement of customers for single console management as well as space utilization concerns and power utilization concerns.

We mostly work with customers who are looking for a solution with single rack configurations and less power utilization, also requiring fewer resources and a single console that could be managed. HPE Synergy solution is one of the solutions for these requirements.

Regarding HPE Synergy, the most valuable feature is that the whole solution and the whole system operate in passive mode, and there are very few chances of downtime as all the components in HPE Synergy are redundant, including VC Flex modules and interconnect modules, as well as power supply and fan modules.

Other networking and storage connectivity modules are also redundant, and we can mount the entire Synergy frame in a single rack. If we fully populate a Synergy frame with 12 servers, 12 physical machines could be mounted in one Synergy frame, mostly with redundant power supplies and networking ports along with SAN connectivity on a single console.

In my opinion, for future improvements in HPE Synergy, there should be better management of power consumption complexity as well as an increase in the number of servers that can fit in a single Synergy frame.

I have about two years or 1.5 years of experience with HPE Synergy.

I find that the initial setup for HPE Synergy is not directly complicated from my end because we are partners and not certified to deploy Synergy frames. Therefore, we engage our HPE certified engineers from the distributor to perform the deployment and setup of initial Synergy frames and blade servers.

I consider HPE Synergy a stable solution. All components in the HPE Synergy solution are redundant. If we experience any downtime in a component, a redundant one is available in our Synergy frame. Therefore, the downtime and stability for HPE Synergy solution are very good and highly appreciated.

In my opinion, HPE Synergy is a great option regarding scalability. If a customer is initially setting up their data center and looking for resources and physical machines, they can start with one, two to three blade servers in a Synergy frame and can expand their resources as per their workload and rising requirements in the future. They just need blade servers to plug in, and with HPE Synergy frame, they can fulfill all their requirements in a single solution.

If we talk about rack mount servers, while they can mount 12 rack mount servers in a single rack, if a customer has more requirements in the future, they must need a separate rack to deploy them. If a customer has a Synergy frame and space available, they just need to buy the blade servers and plug and play the servers into their Synergy frame to accommodate their changing requirements accordingly.

I would rate the technical support from HPE Synergy, and for all other solutions, as very good and appreciable with a score of nine out of ten on a scale from one to ten.

Positive

As far as the prices are concerned, rack mount solutions are less expensive than HPE Synergy prices; however, HPE Synergy prices are higher but justify themselves as the solution accommodates all the requirements in a single console and solution. I believe customers mostly prefer HPE Synergy solutions for their needs.

HPE Converged System is managed using HPE Converged and Hyper-Converged solutions.

Regarding HPE Converged System, I have not done any working on systems or solutions for SAP HANA so for ProLiant X or converged system SimpliVity. We haven't built any deal or have done any working on the system.

I have experience working on HPE Synergy.

We mostly deploy the HPE Synergy solution on-prem systems among our clients.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate HPE Synergy an eight.

Our use cases depend on each customer's needs which might include running standalone services or creating orchestration for VMware or Hyper-V clouds.  

Our team looks at each use case to determine needs, the environment, and strategies for achieving goals. We then match hardware and software to goals and cooperate across teams to implement solutions. 

We have 50 staff members across various teams who manage implementations and maintenance.

The composable infrastructure allows you to build and stack a lot of shared capacity to create a package solution. Bandwidth possibilities for connecting are great and composability allows you to work with the compute nodes to choose phone panels and devices.

Orchestrating automations is easy because you can connect to other tools with the REST API and automate components.

The solution is written in simple nodes so it can be used for many things.

The blade server has great performance. 

The hardware is fine but OneView needs additional event management and filtering options.

Documentation could better describe the solution's configuration possibilities.

Sometimes there are firmware or software difficulties when connecting between networks or with storage. The solution is a hardware that is defined by its software so management issues can occur on servers or within the software running the hardware. For example, an electric car depends on its software. If the software is bad, then you can expect issues and problems that might not allow you to start the car. A technician might have uploaded the wrong code into firmware or a software developer might have make code mistakes and these things cause issues. The solution can only be as reliable as the software used to run it.

I have been using the solution for one year. 

From a hardware point of view, the solution's memory discs and connectivity are quite stable. 

The solution's stability is dependent on the software used. HPE partners with vendors to provide memory modules and Hynix disks from Seagate or Western Digital and they are quite stable. If you have stability issues, they are likely caused by a software problem.

Past firmware issues have been fixed with a package release. 

On very rare occasion you might have a broken CPU or defective memory modules but I have only experienced that a few times in my entire career that spans many solutions. 

The solution's signature feature is its scalability. 

Technical support is fine and resolves ticket issues. 

We know how to manage or implement the solution so we do not really need support. We also take advantage of training courses.

Our company uses multiple vendors including the solution, Cisco, and Lenovo. Enterprise architects make vendor decisions for each use case. 

The setup requires some knowledge of infra or it might be complex. Once you are used to the solution, it is quite simple to cable, connect, and implement. 

Training courses, guides, and instructions are comprehensive and included on the solution's support page. 

Our company implements the solution for customers. Deployments are based on use cases or management strategies and are mixed between on-premises and the cloud. 

An implementation might include twelve compute nodes in one chassis and one frame. This might connect to a master module that provides connectivity for three frames. If you set it up correctly, all you have to do is add the compute node, create the server profile in OneView, and connect to the proper adapters. A server team then takes over to implement the operating system. 

Testing and implementation takes one day because you cooperate with teams to set up ports, switches, and internal or external storage. Implementation might take longer if there are many blades, frames, or tools connected to the environment for reporting, monitoring, and backup. A very complex implementation that requires cabling in a data center might take one week. 

The solution can be expensive because it requires both hardware and software purchases. It is difficult to determine if the solution is less expensive than other vendors because pricing depends on the system's design, use, and network speeds. Competitor products such as Cisco are similarly expensive. 

The solution is really good, works well, and has passed all internal tests. 

Before using the solution, it is important to contact an experienced technician to ensure proper setup. Learn best practices so you don't become unsatisfied with the solution instead of realizing that there is something wrong with the setup or design.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

Our company has 2,000 developers who use the solution for integration with OneView to manage servers and enclosures. 

We have multiple racks set up with different platform servers like DL, C7K, and Synergy. At least three enclosures are linked together in Synergy which is a prerequisite.  

We set up multiple blade servers, install ESXi hosts, and add the blade servers to VMware as a host. We manage our 30-40 ESXi hosts through vCenter which is private. From there, we test and develop products that will be used in the vCenter application. OneView integrates with vCenter to manage resources. 

The i3S module can be configured to provision storage to all blade servers and boot to any operating system without needing local hard drives. The module  handles configuration for repositories and bootable iOS images so costs are minimized. The module is quite good and very cost effective for production. 

The solution has great architecture and functionality. 

The solution should support Cisco or other vendor interconnect models. Our previous platform supported extenders and interconnects. 

A lower price model should be offered so customers at every level can use the solution. This would allow businesses to grow their data centers and be more competitive with Dell and Cisco. 

I have been using the solution for five years. 

The solution is very stable. 

The solution is highly scalable. We can connect multiple enclosures together and increase the number of hosts or blade servers with no issues. 

We contacted support with issues connecting to the internet and updating features. They were very helpful and provided solutions. A chat option is also available and useful. 

Support is rated an eight out of ten. 

Positive

The setup is easy and everything you need is preloaded. Deployment takes a two or three hours and includes configurations. 

We implemented the solution in-house. A system administrator can repair any items that go bad during setup. The solution is not hard to manage with some experience.

The cost is high or a big investment and that is a drawback for some customers.

A one-time investment of $80,000 to $100,000 is needed for high-end servers that are very stable. If these are your needs, the investment is worth it. 

I recommend using the solution and rate it an eight out of ten.

I typically recommend HPE Synergy to companies in the banking sector, government, and telecom operators because of its centralized management and ease of administration.

The centralized management of HPE Synergy is beneficial because it is easy to manage and administer. Additionally, it offers significant compute power in approximately ten rack units, making it practical for workload optimization.

HPE Synergy could improve by developing the chassis to allow for more drives or disks. Currently, it supports only two drives in the blade server, which can be limiting.

I have been familiar with HPE Synergy for around five years.

Pricing in the blade server market is very competitive, with HPE offering a competitive price. Competitor products include Dell's MX series and Cisco's UCS X series.

I am also familiar with and resell Dell’s MX series and Cisco's UCS X series, which are competitive alternatives to HPE Synergy.

In addition to developing the chassis for more drives, HPE Synergy could also enhance the overall portfolio by adding a strong backup solution. I would rate HPE Synergy nine out of ten.

Our standalone servers and Windows hypervisors are running on the product.

It is a good product for hypervisors. The performance is fine.

The firmware, software, and driver levels must be improved. The product should be stabilized as soon as possible. Some hardware of the product was not in good condition. We faced some issues within six months. We requested HPE to replace them. The solution must concentrate on improving the product quality.

I have been using the solution for more than two to three years.

The tool is stable. I rate the product’s stability a seven or eight out of ten. We faced a few hardware failures.

The tool is scalable. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten. There were some limitations on some hardware. Around 8000 people use the product in my organization.

The solution provides good support. The support team will be available on-site for any new installation or configuration needs. In middle-east, HPE’s support team is far better than any other company. Support is important.

We were using a different solution before. We switched to HPE because of the support provided by them.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The deployment took one or two hours. A consultant from HPE helped us deploy the product. We needed one or two people to deploy the tool.

The license comes with the solution.

The solution is periodically making improvements. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for infrastructure and business applications. We have the mini virtualization and physical servers. We need to consolidate all the servers in one management.

The most valuable of Synergy is the architecture and hardware-software combination. There is a layer between the OS andI have used HPE C7000, Cisco UCS, and Dell PowerEdge M. the hardware. It easily manages the servers.

Using HPE Transporters instead of train switches would simplify network configuration by creating a flat network without zoning between servers and storage, fostering tighter integration.

The product is stable and redundant.

The solution is scalable with the same switches up to five frames.

I'm using tech support for compatibility and some complex configurations.

I have used HPE C7000, Cisco UCS, and Dell PowerEdge M.

The initial setup is easy.

Synergy delivers a strong ROI for more complex solutions like VMware Cloud Foundation deployments or when using six or more nodes.

You have to propose Synergy with your customer base.

It is easy to maintain the solution because InfoSight is applied to Synergy.

HPE Synergy solutions are a unified platform. However, some organizations might prefer solutions from other vendors like IBM or Cisco, depending on their specific budget and design requirements.

HPE Synergy has excellent support with mini service centers, contributing to a positive customer experience.

Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I'm using the solution for managing cloud infrastructure for data centers. We are using it to manage the center. We manage and store data over there. We use it for RMCV and RMCVO.

It connects with VMware and helps us manage VMware data storage. 

It's cloud-based.

It gives a lot of flexibility for managing data storage. There are a lot of options and places where we can manage the entire infrastructure, from virtual machines to storage devices.

OneView is also a part of the product, which is useful. It's part of the infrastructure. 

It's very useful in the process of restoring data. 

The initial setup is fine. 

It has plug-ins with VMware and vCenter infrastructure. It's easy to manage the VMware cloud-based infrastructure and VMware.

There is an HP plugin we need to enable in vCenter for RMCV backups. Sometimes we observe that the data storing is not happening correctly. It's like that data store, whatever we have added in Synergy, takes a backup in a day. Sometimes we observe that the backup is not happening properly. We used to get alert emails that the backup was failing for the particular storage. In that case, we needed to do a restoration during that time. It would give us a lot of trouble to restore the VM from a particular backup.

There is no expertise. There is a lack of expertise at an acceptable level from the technical teams. We need very senior higher-level technical teams to come in in the future. 

It takes a lot of time to analyze the logs.

In the Generation 10 modules, we have observed that very often the server has hardware issues. We have to frequently contact the vendors. 

I've used the solution for one and a half years. 

It's a stable, reliable product. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The scalability is fine. We can increase the sizes of the test stores.

I'd rate the solution 6.5 out of ten in terms of scalability.

We have hundreds of people on the product right now. 

Technical support could be better. 

Neutral

It is easy to set up the solution. 

The deployment did not take very long. It just takes a couple of days to set up the infrastructure.

The installation may take some time. You have to plug in all of these things and do fail testing, et cetera. We did use Oracle databases and sometimes they might fail. The snapshot and remote snapshot, for example, were not happening on time. That takes time in terms of resolving those issues if they come up. You might have to run a script for contact support.

We handled the initial setup process ourselves. 

We pay about £500 for the solution. I'm not aware of the exact licensing terms. 

I'm a customer and end-user.

I would advise people to try the solution. It is easy to manage. That said, in order to manage HPE Synergy Servers, you'll want to install OneView.

I'd rate the product seven out of ten.

HPE Synergy could improve its remote support.

I have been familiar with HPE Synergy for approximately 10 years.

HPE Synergy is a stable solution.

The scalability of HPE Synergy is good.

The support is good they have helped us.

I have used Lenovo and they have large servers and are easy to support.

The deployment of HPE Synergy is easy and takes approximately three to four hours.

My advice to others is this solution is easy to deploy.

I rate HPE Synergy an eight out of ten.