Cisco UCS B-Series OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Cisco UCS B-Series is the #3 ranked solution in top Blade Servers. PeerSpot users give Cisco UCS B-Series an average rating of 8.6 out of 10. Cisco UCS B-Series is most commonly compared to HPE Synergy: Cisco UCS B-Series vs HPE Synergy. Cisco UCS B-Series is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 65% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 19% of all views.
Cisco UCS B-Series Buyer's Guide

Download the Cisco UCS B-Series Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: December 2022

What is Cisco UCS B-Series?
Based on Intel Xeon processor E7 and E5 product families, Cisco UCS B-Series Blade Servers work with virtualized and non-virtualized applications to increase: Performance, Energy efficiency, Flexibility and Administrator productivity.

Cisco UCS B-Series was previously known as UCS B-Series, Unified Computing System B-Series.

Cisco UCS B-Series Customers
Aegean Motorway, Anilana Hotels and Resorts, Anonymous Banking Group, Artoni Transporti, Bellevue, BH Telecom, Bowling Green State University, Children's Hospital Colorado, City of Biel, Dimension Data, Dualtec Cloud Builders, Hertz, Houston Methodist, Kuwait Petroleum Italia, Lufthansa Systems GmbH & Co.KG, Outscale, Sony Corporation, Talbots
Cisco UCS B-Series Video

Cisco UCS B-Series Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Cisco UCS B-Series pricing:
  • "Pricing will be based on your requirements so it is important to plan, engage, and negotiate directly with the Cisco Account Manager."
  • "The licensing cost is a little bit expensive because by default, it depends on your fabric interconnect model. Most of the time, however, Cisco provides a lot of promotions to the customers, so the cost can be waived for many projects. The price of the chassis itself is fair."
  • "The cost of the blade servers is okay, but the cost of Fabric Interconnects ends up increasing the overall costs. For example, suppose it costs 3,500 USD per blade server. When you include the Fabric Interconnects, you could pay up to 30,000 USD. Therefore, compared to the cost of servers from Lenovo, Huawei, Dell, or HP, the cost of Cisco servers can be high. However, Cisco gives good discounts (about 90% to 94%) to partners and to customers who are already using Cisco servers. New Cisco customers do not get the level of discount that an existing customer does. Because you can get discounts with Cisco, I would give pricing a rating of four out of five."
  • "This is a premium device and our clients are not as concerned about the reasonableness of the price compared to satisfaction with their productivity."
  • Cisco UCS B-Series Reviews

    Filter by:
    Filter Reviews
    Industry
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Company Size
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Job Level
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Rating
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Considered
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Order by:
    Loading...
    • Date
    • Highest Rating
    • Lowest Rating
    • Review Length
    Search:
    Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
    Sr. Network Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Processing of our system has greatly improved due to the CPU, functionality and security features
    Pros and Cons
    • "Great security and functionality."
    • "Integration with storage could be improved."

    What is our primary use case?

    We host mostly our production environment in these Blades. We choose this series due to the reliability/stability and for ease of scalability. We are a 24/7 business and uptime is most critical for us. Stable environment with 99.99% uptime including a good scalable architecture is something like "Gold with Fragrance"

    How has it helped my organization?

    Management wise, I liked the "Service Profile" concept where we can create the appropriate profiles for the blades and just deploy them with ease. Time management and getting the configuration right is important so that there are no hassle during the initial setup. Performance wise, I like it better than the HP Proliant servers.

    What is most valuable?

    We jumped from old HP servers to this UCS and, of course, we very much like it in terms of its security, its interface, its functionality, the CPU, the memory and its central management interface. The computing power that it's given us has greatly improved the processing of our system. Overall, it's good.

    What needs improvement?

    Integration with the storage to get a heatmap of what's going on in the storage site could be improved -- the dashboard, that kind of thing. We have a virtualized environment and it's the same dashboard that links together the front end, the VMware and the backend storage. We have to use multiple views, multiple solutions for that. We log in to multiple places to see what's going on in the storage, what's going on in the switches, on the Blades, on the VMware. It would be great if there was a single platform, a dashboard that could integrate all of those. That kind of improvement wouldn't just help me but would also benefit management. If they want to see what's going on, for example, to get a five-year forecast, and the dashboard could show how much space is left for computing power, or show that something is not working, that would make a difference. 

    Buyer's Guide
    Cisco UCS B-Series
    December 2022
    Learn what your peers think about Cisco UCS B-Series. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: December 2022.
    657,397 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using this solution for five years. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I especially like the scalability aspect because, compared to the HP servers that we had before, those were rack-mount servers whereas the Blade is just a plug and play. If we need more computing power, we just bring a new Blade and plug it in and auto-conservation setup in the profiler takes over the new Blade and it's that easy. We are a team of three admins using this solution. 

    How are customer service and support?

    We haven't had a chance to contact Cisco for any issues because everything has been running smooth and fine. And we have our corporate team as well. If there's an issue we reach out to them first before reaching out for support. It's been three years and we haven't had any major issues, we've been able to solve anything that's come up. 

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    In short, management with a central dashboard is really good as compared to the older HP Proliant environment. You have a bird's eye view of your infrastructure through the dashboard.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was pretty good. It was a new thing for us and took us some time, but it was good, it was straightforward. We had to deploy it here first to make sure everything was up and running. It required a lot of regression tests before moving it to the actual production site and that's what took time. It wasn't the time taken to configure it, but the time taken to deploy the whole system in the production site. We did the deployment ourselves. 

    What was our ROI?

    Having experience with the product for over 5 years, the ROI is definitely over our expectations. The level of performance improvement has increased in such a way that we are able to scale up with the ability to process more data (faster), making our customers happy with the output. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Price wise, Cisco B-series was better. 

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We compared it with HP C7000 series blade infrastructure but the Cisco B-Series cost that was presented to us and the comparison of performance details were superior.

    What other advice do I have?

    I haven't had experience with others series, like the C-Series. I hope they are good but so far, after three, four years, this has been good and we haven't had any issues. 

    I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Hoang Quan Nguyen - PeerSpot reviewer
    Infrastructure Integration Analyst at a government with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 5
    Supports abstract and stateless computing, helpful and proactive support, reliable, and expandable
    Pros and Cons
    • "The feature that I found the most value is the abstract and stateless capacities."
    • "USC Central seems a bit confusing for technicians."

    What is our primary use case?

    The UCS Manager, UCS Blades including chassis, and Main Data Centre Virtualization Physical Infrastructure on VMware between sites act as our critical and secure data center environment.

    This solution is reliable, expandable, agile, manageable, and scales easily, allowing us to focus on using UCS Manager. We are now expanding the Cisco Hyperconverged solution embedded with the UCS manager.

    This is the plus to expand the reliability, expandability, redundancy, and availability of our data center infrastructure environment.

    How has it helped my organization?

    This host-provisioning solution gives us peace of mind, SLA level, and ease of management from the operation team. It is reliable and gives me confidence when I upgrade firmware and expand the capacities of the data center.

    Think about adding compute in 30 minutes instead of hours of technical effort. It reduced the amount of time that tech spent on support and operations instead of maintaining the whole infrastructure level.

    ROI for the UCS manager solution is high and has lifted pressures and stressful burdens upon SWE.

    What is most valuable?

    Overall, all functionalities are excellent.

    The feature that I found the most value is the abstract and stateless capacities. 

    What needs improvement?

    USC Central seems a bit confusing for technicians.

    Many functionalities that are not used for a small environment should be enforced at the enterprise level.

    I would like to see USC Central offered free for use, as well as made simpler to use for technicians. This will improve its adoption rate, especially for environments that are not exposed to the internet.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We have been using UCS Managers and UCS Blade for more than five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Stability-wise, it is excellent.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    This is a scalable product.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Technical support is excellent.

    With the help of Cisco tech support, I just finished an upgrade of firmware and felt that the support team is helpful and proactive in helping customers.

    I feel that Cisco tech has value. They provided me assistance and guided me through difficulties. Overall, I felt that they were excellent and I appreciated it very much, especially the consistency in following up on what is happening, including progress.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I had used HP enclosures in a different environment.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is always straightforward.

    What about the implementation team?

    We initiated the engagement with Cisco Tech Team, and eventually, we can take ourselves.

    What was our ROI?

    The ROI is huge and I was surprised after seeing it when the environment was set up and stable.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I was not involved with the specific pricing agreement, so I don't know. However, I am familiar with some of the aspects.

    Generally, the cheaper, the better. I believe that this is part of the procurement management that must be involved with requirements. Pricing will be based on your requirements so it is important to plan, engage, and negotiate directly with the Cisco Account Manager.

    I have an excellent relationship and experience with them. They are accommodating in all areas such as reaching out, checking and engaging in setup and configuration of equipment that has arrived, training, help in designing, consulting, pricing, and licensing.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    As part of our evaluation phase, we researched three vendors. Each was assessed using a scorecard to rate each in terms of functionality as it related to our environment. The scale was from one to five.

    What other advice do I have?

    Overall, this is an excellent product.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Private Cloud
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Buyer's Guide
    Cisco UCS B-Series
    December 2022
    Learn what your peers think about Cisco UCS B-Series. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: December 2022.
    657,397 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Ehsan Emad - PeerSpot reviewer
    Senior Data Scientist & Analytics at a integrator with 11-50 employees
    Reseller
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Has a very easy, convenient, stable, and scalable architecture
    Pros and Cons
    • "The most valuable feature that the B-Series has is related to the structure and architecture of the solution because in these solutions, you are using fabric interconnect as an interconnect device. The beauty of fabric interconnect is that it can work as in-house mode."
    • "The license is expensive. Cisco should decrease the delay in the delivery of their products."

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable feature that the B-Series has is related to the structure and architecture of the solution because in these solutions, you are using fabric interconnect as an interconnect device. The beauty of fabric interconnect is that it can work as in-house mode.

    Fabric interconnect is the main component in the UCS solution. Fabric interconnect can act as two modes. One is in-house mode, and the other one is switching mode. The recommended one is in-house mode. When it works in in-house mode, it means that it won't process any storage, like flagging things, zoning, etc. It won't process Spanning Tree Protocol either. It will just proxy everything to the higher switch.

    For example, if you have storage network traffic, the fabric interconnect won't process your flagging. It will make a proxy, and send it to your NPIV storage switch. It acts literally as in-house, and that makes the solution and architecture very easy, convenient, and scalable.

    The other important feature is the switch technology that Cisco uses on their chassis. It's not like those of other brands. The beauty of Cisco is that with traffic interconnect, your network and storage won't come down to the chassis level.

    It will stop at the fabric interconnect, and the traffic between the fabric interconnect and the chassis acts very similar to the fixed technology that Cisco uses between 2K and 5K. This means that the same architecture and the same technology that we use between 2K and 5K is used between the fabric interconnect and the IO module that's used at the back of the chassis.

    This means that when you are using the IOM input/output module, the IOM module on the back of the chassis will not be like a regular switchboard. It will be just IO. So, this means that it is scalable. You can add as many chassis as you want to this whole solution, and you can remove them. You can move one chassis to another chassis. You can move one server from chassis one to chassis eight or chassis seven. You can have a lot of clusters. You can have a lot of failovers over the whole package.

    Recently, with the new chassis, UCS X-Series, that Cisco recently introduced to the market, it is much more scalable.

    What needs improvement?

    The license is expensive.

    Cisco should decrease the delay in the delivery of their products.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It's very stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Cisco UCS B-Series is more scalable because of the blade servers. It's one of the most scalable solutions in the whole world.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The licensing cost is a little bit expensive because by default, it depends on your fabric interconnect model. Most of the time, however, Cisco provides a lot of promotions to the customers, so the cost can be waived for many projects. The price of the chassis itself is fair.

    What other advice do I have?

    On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this solution at ten.

    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner/Reseller
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Rishabh_Jain - PeerSpot reviewer
    Senior Member Of Technical Staff at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Is easy to scale, and the servers have reduced complexity
    Pros and Cons
    • "The scalability is good because it comes with Fabric Interconnects, and you can directly add more blades as you go. Therefore, scalability is not a problem."
    • "Compared to the deployment of servers such as Dell XCDs, the deployment of UCS servers is more complex. They take longer to deploy."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use it primarily for computing purposes.

    What is most valuable?

    The complexity is reduced by having one blade with four servers and half-blade servers. The server profile makes it easier to deploy and to manage with Cisco UCS Manager.

    Cisco provides good flexibility to choose different products or different equipment within the blade servers, like CPU memory, logic board, etc., to make your own server. Other vendors don't have this option.

    What needs improvement?

    If a customer is moving towards a UCS-only solution, then it would be great if storage could be provided with it.

    Compared to the deployment of servers such as Dell XCDs, the deployment of UCS servers is more complex. They take longer to deploy.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have used Cisco UCS B-Series for around two to three years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    These are not stable servers because we have seen some cases where the servers have gone down when there were power fluctuations. Though the servers came with in-built batteries and in-built SPS, the blade servers were not accessible. They're designed to have one blade not dependent on another blade, but they still went down.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The scalability is good because it comes with Fabric Interconnects, and you can directly add more blades as you go. Therefore, scalability is not a problem.

    How are customer service and support?

    I have not had any issues with technical support. Because the solution has been in the market for 15 years now, the support is mature. I'd give technical support a rating of nine out of ten. 

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    How was the initial setup?

    As a partner who has deployed multiple servers, I found the initial deployment to be okay. However, it was not the easiest process. From a customer's perspective, the initial deployment can be a challenge. The customer could do something unknowingly that could make the whole system go down. Because we need to create server profiles, etc., I would rate the initial setup at three out of five.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The cost of the blade servers is okay, but the cost of Fabric Interconnects ends up increasing the overall costs. For example, suppose it costs 3,500 USD per blade server. When you include the Fabric Interconnects, you could pay up to 30,000 USD. Therefore, compared to the cost of servers from Lenovo, Huawei, Dell, or HP, the cost of Cisco servers can be high. However, Cisco gives good discounts (about 90% to 94%) to partners and to customers who are already using Cisco servers. New Cisco customers do not get the level of discount that an existing customer does. Because you can get discounts with Cisco, I would give pricing a rating of four out of five.

    What other advice do I have?

    On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cisco UCS B-Series at eight.

    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    AMADO PLATA - PeerSpot reviewer
    IT Infrastructure Manager at a tech company with 11-50 employees
    Real User
    Top 10
    A user-friendly server that's easy to configure and manage
    Pros and Cons
    • "I like that it's very manageable very easy to use and configure. I am not an expert, but the graphic user interface is quite simple very easy to use. It's a complete solution."
    • "We have to have Java to manage the infrastructure. It would be great if we can manage the infrastructure through a web browser."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use it in our data center. In our infrastructure, we virtualize our servers.

    What is most valuable?

    I like that it's very manageable very easy to use and configure. I am not an expert, but the graphic user interface is quite simple very easy to use. It's a complete solution.

    What needs improvement?

    We have to have Java to manage the infrastructure. It would be great if we can manage the infrastructure through a web browser. 

    We have Dell EMC, and I would like to connect my product directly to the chassis. I would like to have an interface to integrate the storage directly chassis and not through the network. If that could be possible, that would be great for me. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Cisco UCS B200 since 2015.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    We haven't had any problem or any outage, and it's always running. Every process and everything you run, memory and cache memory, is always running. It's very stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I think it's very scalable. I have an opportunity to provide for more Blade Servers, and if I need more power or resources, I just have to provide the Blade Servers. Right now, we have two administrators.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    When we had a problem once with a virtual server, our Cisco partner came to us within three hours and provided support. It was very good.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We have stand-alone servers, and we used Dell Servers. For example, we installed VMware on top of the server. When we needed more power or infrastructure that's a little bit easier to buy, we bought this Cisco UCS platform.

    How was the initial setup?

    I don't know if it was straightforward because our partner set up and deployed this solution. It took about 20 days to implement this solution.

    What about the implementation team?

    We received the infrastructure entirely configured by our partner. It was a very good experience.

    What other advice do I have?

    Before you buy infrastructure like this, I would recommend some training. It'll help to get really good training in infrastructure management. For example, in my case, a quick overview when I started to manage the infrastructure definitely helped. It's very hard because at the beginning you are a little lost. The infrastructure is easy to manage, but it would be better if you take time before you install the infrastructure to learn more.

    On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco UCS B-Series a nine.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Associate Engineer at Quess GTS
    Real User
    Top 20
    Flexible boot functionality, allows for a complex network design, and has good technical support
    Pros and Cons
    • "The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
    • "This product uses a converged network adapter because it is the only way to provide flexibility with both fiber and ethernet connections."

    What is our primary use case?

    We are a solution provider and this is one of the products that we implement for our clients. These systems are for advanced data.

    What is most valuable?

    The template feature is very good, and it works well.

    The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location.

    I like the level of complexity that this product offers because I have a lot of relevant knowledge, which makes troubleshooting and performance tuning easier.

    What needs improvement?

    This product uses a converged network adapter because it is the only way to provide flexibility with both fiber and ethernet connections.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been working with the Cisco UCS B-Series for approximately three years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    This is a stable product. However, if the customer is using devices from different vendors on the same network then there can be some small problems.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    This product is very much scalable. Once you are using active/passive devices, you can switch them depending on the needs of the infrastructure.

    Only one of my clients has this device implemented.

    How are customer service and support?

    The technical support is very good. They are very knowledgeable and have taught us a lot.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I work with a variety of Cisco products. For example, I have a lot of clients that are using Cisco firewalls. As such, I have a lot of experience with Cisco devices including HyperFlex, UCS, Nexus 7K, 5K, 2K, and 1K virtualization.

    Some of my clients are using products from vendors such as HP or Dell, rather than using a Cisco Blade Server. I also have customers using VxRack and VxRail. the Cisco products consume less energy, and I prefer to implement them.

    How was the initial setup?

    The level of complexity for the initial setup depends on the client. For example, new clients usually only require a normal design. For clients that redesign their network, there is some inherent complexity.

    In general, a hyperconverged system is very easy to configure.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    This is a premium device and our clients are not as concerned about the reasonableness of the price compared to satisfaction with their productivity.

    What other advice do I have?

    This is a product that I recommend. If somebody instead chooses to implement a Dell, then they will have a converged system or will be using NetApp. This is much more complex than setting up a hyperconverged system.

    I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    VMware Software Engineer at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Easy to manage with helpful technical support and good performance
    Pros and Cons
    • "The solution is stable."
    • "The solution is difficult to set up."

    What is our primary use case?

    The solution can be useful for cloud solutions and they are automatized. Everything is automatized, and it's highly available.

    What is most valuable?

    The solution is stable.

    The scalability is good.

    Everything is nice and I like that it is centrally managed. 

    It's very easy to manage once you have everything set up.

    The performance is great.

    Technical support is helpful.

    What needs improvement?

    We sometimes have small issues with the hardware elements. The network interfaces could be better. The product needs to develop better firmware.  

    The solution is difficult to set up. You need to be experienced in the product in order to be able to implement it.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've used the solution for more than three years in this company, and in my previous company, I used it for two and a half to three years as well. In total, it's been five to six years. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The solution, for the most part, is pretty stable. There aren't really bugs or glitches and it doesn't really crash or freeze. It's pretty reliable. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The scalability of the solution is good. 

    I'm not sure how many people are actually using the product. In America, we utilize about 3,000 servers and we utilize 4,000 servers ourselves. That's a total of 7,000 servers.

    How are customer service and support?

    Technical support has been very good. We don't have any complaints. They are helpful and responsive. 

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup can be a bit difficult and complex. This is because everything is centralized. That said, once you have everything deployed and up and running, the maintenance is easy and minimal. While you have to sacrifice something during the installation, after that, it's easier to manage. 

    It took us about two months to complete the implementation.

    What about the implementation team?

    We had a third party that handled the implementation process for us. We had a lot of server blades to set up.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I don't have any visibility on the licensing setup. That's managed by procurement, actually. I don't have any information about it.

    What other advice do I have?

    We use both cloud and on-premises deployment models.

    I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

    I'd recommend the solution to other users and other organizations. 

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    BOUMAIZA Aymen - PeerSpot reviewer
    Infrastructure Consultant at Adactim
    Consultant
    Top 20
    Powerful virtualization capabilities, responsive technical support, and easy to manage
    Pros and Cons
    • "The most valuable feature is the ability to replace a server with another one, simply by applying the profile"
    • "This model does not support virtualization of the switch."

    What is our primary use case?

    We do not use the Cisco UCS B-Series in our company. Rather, we support it for one of our customers.

    Using this product allows for the virtualization of all things, including MAC addresses and the profile. If we have an issue in a physical server then we just have to remove it, put another one in its place, and reapply the profile.

    I'm not an expert in using the UCS Blade but I work on it enough to speak a little bit about it. My primary job is support, although I perform some actions.

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable feature is the ability to replace a server with another one, simply by applying the profile. This is not possible with others, where the MAC address is not virtualized.

    If there is an issue with a server then it's simple to replace. In 10 minutes, it can be done, even if there's a hardware issue. This is the most powerful and important aspect.

    What needs improvement?

    This model does not support virtualization of the switch.

    There are occasionally hardware problems that may be related to memory. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been working with Cisco UCS B-Series for two years. The company was using the same solution before I joined.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Although we have experienced some hardware issues, that is normal for this product. Overall, it is stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    This is a scalable solution.

    We have four people that work with it.

    How are customer service and support?

    When we have had hardware problems, technical support comes to our site to replace the defective part. The support team is good, including their response time.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I did not work with other similar products before this one.

    There is a new model, the X-Series, that I would like to look at in the future. The B-series will be deprecated shortly. After which, we will need to replace it.

    How was the initial setup?

    I was not part of the deployment, although I have performed general support such as creating profiles.

    What other advice do I have?

    Overall, this Cisco Blade is really good. My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to purchase the support agreement.

    I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user