Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more

Cisco UCS Manager OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Cisco UCS Manager is #38 ranked solution in Infrastructure Monitoring tools. PeerSpot users give Cisco UCS Manager an average rating of 9.0 out of 10. Cisco UCS Manager is most commonly compared to Cisco Intersight: Cisco UCS Manager vs Cisco Intersight. Cisco UCS Manager is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 69% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a comms service provider, accounting for 24% of all views.
Buyer's Guide

Download the IT Infrastructure Monitoring Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: September 2022

What is Cisco UCS Manager?
Cisco UCS Manager helps significantly reduce management and administration expenses by automating routine tasks to increase operational agility. Customers can extend the benefits of Cisco UCS Manager globally across an enterprise to thousands of servers in multiple domains with Cisco UCS Central Software.
Cisco UCS Manager Customers
Management Science Associates, Peak 10, Virtual Consulting Professionals
Cisco UCS Manager Video

Archived Cisco UCS Manager Reviews (more than two years old)

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
IT Infrastructure Engineer with 51-200 employees
Real User
Flexible and easy to expand features with good stability
Pros and Cons
  • "The flexibility and the ease in which the features can be expanded are the solution's most valuable aspects."
  • "The automation within the solution needs to be simplified."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for software computing within our organization.

What is most valuable?

The flexibility and the ease in which the features can be expanded are the solution's most valuable aspects.

What needs improvement?

The automation within the solution needs to be simplified. 

In the next release, the solution should have a central view center or offer administration capabilities for different environments.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for four years.

Buyer's Guide
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
September 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Zabbix and others in IT Infrastructure Monitoring. Updated: September 2022.
634,590 professionals have used our research since 2012.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is quite stable. We've never witnessed any bug or glitches. We also haven't experienced any crashes that would lead us to believe the stability is in question. It's very good.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability of the solution is okay. You do get some scalability, but it's not fully scalable per se.

How are customer service and support?

We've reached out to technical support in the past. The support they've provided has been great. We're satisfied with the level of service that they've given us.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was complex. It was not straightforward. There's just too much effort to set up a simple environment.

The environment was quite large and the implementation process required a number of people.

Currently, we have six people who handle ongoing maintenance on the solution.

What about the implementation team?

We used a consultant that was able to assist us with the implementation.

What other advice do I have?

In terms of advice of how other users can implement the solution, I'd caution that it depends on what they like to use. If you need to have server usage, for example, for Oracle, for Microsoft Hyper V, VMware, or different solutions, then it's not the best.

For us, the complexity was too high especially when it comes to expanding it for other purposes.

I'd rate the solution 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.
PeerSpot user
PankajKumar12 - PeerSpot reviewer
Data Engineer at a media company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5
Easy to manage and simple but has limited scalability options
Pros and Cons
  • "Cisco UCS Manager is overall a good package because it gives a GUI interface and a CLI."
  • "Cisco UCS Manager is not a scalable solution because once you have 160 blades, it cannot be expanded more."

What is our primary use case?

Cisco UCS Manager helps us manage all the blades so we can apply quality to templates. Recently, we have installed VMware vCenter from where we manage it. Cisco UCS Manager gives us control of all the blades with a maximum of 160 blades in a single UCS Manager. From there we can manage all the hardware related issues, like upgrades.

What is most valuable?

Cisco UCS Manager is a simple solution. Their technical support is good because whenever we need to generate a technical log, we can generate it from the console itself. It gives ease of management. Cisco UCS Manager is overall a good package because it offers a GUI interface and a CLI. We use Cisco UCS PowerTool to manage through.

What needs improvement?

In terms of what can be improved, the help dashboard could. Usually, we use vCenter. If I go to an option called Performance Monitoring, it gives us metrics in real-time.

The performance dashboard should be out in front of the UCS Manager - as soon as you log in you should see the dashboard. That should be improved. Another thing is the inventory management dashboard. Inventory is like a configuration database. So we should also be able to pull all the details which can give answers so we do not wonder about the HCI data.

Also, scalability could be improved in this solution.

Lastly, it should be more user-friendly because Cisco is a bit of a complex solution. So we are running the VMware environment and it has added capabilities of management.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Mostly it is stable. Sometimes when we upgrade there's a bug or something like that. Then we involve Cisco for the technical support and they help. I've been always grateful because whenever we need them, they are always available.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Cisco UCS Manager is not a scalable solution because once you have 160 blades, it cannot be expanded more. It has a limit of a maximum of 20 chassis which can hold up to 160 blades. Then, if we need 161 blades, we have to install another Cisco UCS Manager to manage it. That is not expandable. If you have a large volume of blades to support, like 1000 blades, we'd have to divide 1000 by 160 and that will be the number of UCS Managers in our environment.

How are customer service and technical support?

I've been in touch with them. They are very good at the technical level.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward and not so complex.

I think it is a 20 minute job to mount UCS Manager.

What about the implementation team?

I implemented it myself.

What other advice do I have?

Now people have many more options. If you're talking about HCI, Cisco has it. They have their own product called Cisco HyperFlex. Though if you are looking for a single short solution then you probably will not find it here.

On a scale from one to 10, I would rate Cisco UCS Manager a seven.

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
Buyer's Guide
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
September 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Zabbix and others in IT Infrastructure Monitoring. Updated: September 2022.
634,590 professionals have used our research since 2012.
IT Infrastructure Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Stable and scalable but extremely complex
Pros and Cons
  • "Technical support has been good so far. We haven't had any issues with them. We're satisfied with the level of service they provide our company."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

The solution is primarily used to manage user infrastructure.

What is most valuable?

It's difficult to pinpoint the exact features which are the most valuable to our organization.

What needs improvement?

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.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for about six or seven years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution offers quite good stability. We haven't had a problem at all with it. It's quite good.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We don't have too much equipment, so we haven't tried to scale it too much ourselves. However, the solution is actually quite scalable if a company needs to.

We have about six people using the solution in our company.

I'm not a system administrator, so I don't know if we plan to increase the usage. I personally don't intend to.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support has been good so far. We haven't had any issues with them. We're satisfied with the level of service they provide our company.

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

We previously used different products. We had an IBM blade server but integrated the management, so it was a very different scenario to what we have now. The previous solution no longer exists, so we had no choice but to switch solutions and we chose Cisco.

How was the initial setup?

The initial installation itself is not very complicated. However, the configuration of the solution can be quite complex.

Deployment times vary. It can be anywhere from a few hours to several weeks. It depends on the company and what needs to happen with the configuration. In our case, it took about a week to deploy it.

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

Currently, we're mostly paying for maintenance. As for the cost of the solution itself, I'm not sure what it is.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We were evaluating both Cisco and HP and eventually ended up choosing Cisco.

What other advice do I have?

We're not partners with Cisco. I'm a user of the solution and also a consultant.

We're currently using the latest version of the solution. I'm not sure of the exact version number, but it was updated recently.

I don't have specific advice to others considering implementing the product. I'd just say that it's important that they know the product before implementing it.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. You can do pretty much anything you need to on the product, but it's quite complex. If they were able to simplify both the configuration and the user interface, I'd probably give them full marks.

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
Sr. Lead Consultant - Infrastructure | Virtualization & Cloud Computing | SDN |NFV at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Consultant
Easy to use and manage with a good dashboard and portal for core configuration
Pros and Cons
  • "The reporting functionality will give you any report you want."
  • "I would like to see Cisco UCS optionally work as a hyper-converged system because right now, it only operates as a converged system."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use Cisco UCS Manager for VDI and for connecting to a private cloud.

What is most valuable?

Cisco UCS has a fantastic portal to do the core configuration.

The connection between the Cisco UCS server and the network is easy to use and easy to manage.

This solution has all of the requirements for the network using public extenders.

The dashboard is awesome and you can easily get all of the information that you want.

The reporting functionality will give you any report you want.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see Cisco UCS optionally work as a hyper-converged system because right now, it only operates as a converged system.

Adding another layer of embedded virtualization would allow us to sell this as one unit, like Nutanix or VxRail.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Cisco UCS Manager for three years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Cisco UCS is easy to scale.

How was the initial setup?

The first time implementing this solution is a little bit complex. However, after you have the required hands-on experience, the second implementation will be easy. There are a certain number of steps and you follow the documentation.

What other advice do I have?

I have recommended Cisco USC for multiple customers and in particular, one of them was a financial institution.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from using Cisco UCS Manager is that sizing is very important. Once you start thinking about it, you have to understand the requirements, and sizing is important in this regard. Once you understand the requirements, you have to select the right model.

I would rate this solution a nine 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.
PeerSpot user
it_user1219551 - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Architect at a transportation company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Easy to manage and has high availability
Pros and Cons
  • "Ease of management is certainly the most valuable feature in this product."
  • "Upgrading the firmware is a difficult procedure."

What is our primary use case?

Our use case, from our point of view, is that we installed this product in data centers for our customers. I work with six customers currently, and I have to set up the data centers for each of them. For one of them, we run the Cisco UCS Manager. So I have hands-on experience with the setup from end-to-end.  

Usually, we are called by clients specifically about product suggestions. I often personally recommend Cisco UCS because of the high availability. The setup time is quick compared to other products in this category. When we are contracted we have to set up the network, the storage, and other parts of the environment. That means a network and storage link for each and every chassis. But here, because of the configuration of Cisco UCS, we need just one link for all the chassis. This helps us make for quicker delivery time.  

We also monitor the systems, we install and keep spare blades for each and every chassis. Just one or two blades are sufficient for the entire environment. That way, we can easily manage system maintenance. Also, the failover and the profiling system is good with the Cisco product. You can just move the profile to the new blade so that it will start working with the new configuration. This makes it easy during maintenance.  

What is most valuable?

The ease of management is certainly the most valuable feature in this product.  

What needs improvement?

So far the only challenge we face with Cisco UCS is during firmware upgrades. If it happens that there is a failover, and we need to change something in the system, this is where we can run into problems. We can't upgrade the firmware for each component one-at-a-time. It is not a method that will work in a practical way in a larger or global network.  

Nowadays it is some sort of a status symbol or a business necessity for a customer to be in various geographical locations. Because the client can have locations in Australia and the U.S. — in different regions of the world — that tends to make the maintenance of the firmware more difficult. The various business locations offer challenges in that way.  

Usually, when we procure the blades, everything has the same firmware level. This makes sense and is fine if installing in a singular location and for new installations. Everything will match. If it is a new installation and the hardware was not procured at the same time, the firmware for all the components can easily be upgraded because it is still before the implementation.  

But later — say after one year — a customer needs to expand. If we are procuring a new blade, the new blade will come with the new firmware. When the new blade is mounted into the chassis, the old alignment will not understand the new blade because it has new firmware.  

In that case, you need to downgrade the firmware for the new blade or upgrade the firmware for the entire environment. During the firmware upgrades, we would definitely need to take downtime in some cases and the downtime would take too long. We face that challenge all the time in having to choose which path to take during the upgrade. But because of the obvious issues with upgrading the entire environment, it often looks like a better solution to just downgrade the one new blade. We need the option to downgrade or choose the firmware for the component because we cannot upgrade the entire environment. In many cases, we cannot take the downtime for the entire environment because of what it means to the network and the business.  

We should have chances to work with firmware levels in one or two firmware versions and it should be easier to do. Everyone would be comfortable with that. Otherwise, in some cases, there is no point in providing a new blade. Customers will hopefully grow and need new blades. We don't want any extra risk with downtime.  

So Cisco should make an improvement in the firmware upgrade process. No one is providing this kind of solution. But if Cisco would improve that firmware issue, that would be great.  

A new feature that I would suggest is to have the possibility of different types of connections. Within the full-width blade, there are two types of blade: full-width and half-width blade. In the full-width blade, when one link fails, the other link will take care of the entire load. The half-width blade doesn't have that kind of input. It has only one link. If one link goes down, the entire blade goes down. So Cisco should include the feature like that in the half-width blade so it functions more like the full-width blade and is not prone to failure.  

For how long have I used the solution?

I have used UCS Manager for almost six years.  

How are customer service and technical support?

The help that we get from Cisco support is really good, but there can be nuances with the incompatibilities in existing structures that cause complexity. These can take some time to resolve. But the resource is dependable.  

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is complex. I will have to spend a lot of time planning the actual implementation. When we execute the plan it will take about two months. The recommendations of the product to the client, the acceptance and the procurement could take as much as four months. But once they deliver the product, we will take a maximum of six to seven weeks to finish the implementation. This is the outlook for the plan but the implementation does not always work so smoothly.    

What other advice do I have?

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate this solution as an eight out of ten. I use the UCS Manager and I think it is a good solution.  

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
Erhan-Demirhan - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior System Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Flexible, easy to manage, and scalable with a quick, focused technical support
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable features are flexibility and management."
  • "We have three data centers and if we could manage all three data centers using one interface, it would be great."

What is our primary use case?

We are using this infrastructure for the virtualization usage for our ESX servers.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are flexibility and management. If you want a non-standard network or SAN configuration then Cisco UCS is very flexible. 

You can manipulate the ESX server network connection or SAN connections with Cisco UCS.

We are comfortable using Cisco UCS in our virtualization environment. We can control anything in the network or SAN site.

What needs improvement?

Integration can always be improved, but that is not an issue for me because I work in a bank in Turkey. In Turkey, there are some regulations regarding Co//ab in the banking industry. Authorities are not permitted to use Co//ab for banking, so integration is not a use case for us.

The stability could use some improvements.

We have three data centers and if we could manage all three data centers using one interface, it would be great.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Cisco UCS Manager for four and a half years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is very stable. We had some issues with the batteries or memory, but if you look at the bigger picture it is very stable. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This solution is very scalable. We manage two large Cisco UCS environments. There are many servers in it and we can grow and scale a lot if we want, it has a lot of room.

How are customer service and technical support?

I am very happy with the technical support.

When you work with vendors such as HP, IBM or Huawei, you can face these types of problems, but it is not as important because the technical support is very good. If you have any issues they resolve your issue very quickly.

The technical support is fast and focused on finding a solution. If we have errors with the hardware or the software, the technical support solves it immediately.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is very straightforward. In the beginning, it appeared to be complex, but after some time it was very straightforward and you can control everything.

It took three or four days to deploy this solution.

What about the implementation team?

We had the help of the Cisco professionals for the deployment.

What other advice do I have?

I am very happy with Cisco UCS. If I had to choose between other submissions, I would choose the Cisco UCS every time.

It's a wonderful product.

I would rate this solution a ten 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.
PeerSpot user
Senior Systems Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
The dashboard is very good and I like the management I get from it

What is our primary use case?

We mainly use this solution to manage the UCS C and B blades.

What is most valuable?

The management is one of the most valuable features of this solution. I also like the dashboard, as it is quite user-friendly.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have you been using Cisco UCS Manager for around five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We haven't had any stability issues so far.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have about 20 users and I believe this program is scalable.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is good and the team was very helpful.

How was the initial setup?

I installed and deployed the program myself and it was really straightforward.

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

I am not sure what the price is, but you buy the hardware and then you get Cisco UCS Manager for free. 

What other advice do I have?

I would definitely recommend this product to others and my rating for it would be nine out of ten. The pricing can always be better, so I would like to see that being improved. 

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
it_user951996 - PeerSpot reviewer
Network and Security Manager at a energy/utilities company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Good infrastructure management with valuable conferencing features
Pros and Cons
  • "Cisco Infrastructure is one of the top vendors and no one can beat them in terms of switching and routing."
  • "In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to their security."

What is our primary use case?

We use this solution to manage our infrastructure.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are the conferencing in the video and audio, it's a promising solution.

Cisco has the edge on the data portion. The compatibility between the Cisco infrastructure along with the UCS manager or any collaboration solution definitely has more levels.

The Voicemail is smart, it does a good job. It is a luxury that Cisco is providing.

What needs improvement?

Firepower has weaknesses. I had to load several partitions to improve it.

A smart office solution provided us with a demo showing us the camera qualities. I believe that Cisco is moving forward with this.

In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to their security. Also, they have to introduce firewall compatibility in the UCS, as with Firepower where they have a dedicated box with their software, switches, and routing. It's a one-box solution and it would be a huge benefit for Cisco.

Cisco depends on other vendors like IBM and HP for the hardware. Cisco should improve its hardware manufacturing in regards to the UCS and the use of other vendor's hardware.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for twenty one years.

How are customer service and technical support?

I have been working with Cisco for the last twenty-one years. Their technical support is outstanding. There is a huge availability across the globe for the first level of support and installation.

I am very happy with the support.

How was the initial setup?

We deployed this solution on-premises.

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

Cisco is moving forward with its licensing.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

VMware is one of the leading solutions in terms of the voice domain, but they have good competition with Microsoft 2019 that also has the CI solution that Microsoft introduced.

VMware has a good solution in terms of SDDC (Software-Defined Data Center) and now they have a new solution called SCI. It's a mature solution.

One of the negative parts of VMware is the licensing, everything requires a license. VMware is a solution that is costly at the end of the day. This needs to be improved.

What other advice do I have?

Cisco Infrastructure is one of the top vendors and no one can beat them in terms of switching and routing. They have a new solution called Cisco DNA where they have improved the security, OT environment, and IoT.

It is a good solution for WAN technology.

Cisco is on top of the infrastructure.

Cisco Wise Mail IT is now called Unified Messaging. The unity was the first introduction to Cisco for voice mail integrated with cross messaging and now they have a full collaboration solution in one box.

Cisco Tetration Technology has recently been introduced, but it has not yet matured in the market. We haven't used this solution yet as it is not mature yet. We saw a demo in Dubai, they showed us the functionalities.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
PeerSpot user
Ahmed-Omar - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior System Administrator at Royalcement
Real User
Helps us manage our infrastructure and reduce time and effort but upgrades should be made easier
Pros and Cons
  • "The hardware is very powerful and it is a stable solution."
  • "The installation and upgrade sytems need to be improved."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case for this solution is to help us manage our infrastructure and reduce time and effort for these tasks.

How has it helped my organization?

Right now it has improved only some things as we need to upgrade for additional functionality.

What is most valuable?

What would be the most valuable features for us are things we can't even work with yet. We work with an older version of the product that cannot do some things that we need. We can't install the next version because we cannot find great local support assistance for Cisco.

So, instead of using these features through Cisco, which is eventually what we want to do, we blend in with other solutions like Nutanix. The upgrade in Nutanix is very easy and doesn't require downtime. But with Cisco, we have already products and services in the server. We can't afford the downtime that it would take to make the upgrade and we can't find anyone professional to assist us with the problem at this point. 

What needs improvement?

If there were a way to make the upgrade process better, it would be great. Our most important issue right now is to resolve the installation barrier so we can use the product features fully. We needed to phase in new hardware and try again with Cisco HyperFlex M5.

Also if we had one interface, it would solve some operating issues. If we can control all devices from one interface, I think it would help a lot.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using UCS (Unified Computing System) manager for three years

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution itself is very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I think this product is very scalable. We have maybe 50 or 60 users right now working with SAP applications like S/4 HANA and it's working well for now. For now, we do not have immediate plans to scale usage as far as staff, but we are investing in new hardware. This will allow us to make any upgrades before we put the products into production. We can do the upgrade with no downtime no problems.

How are customer service and technical support?

The system for technical support is working well, but I've opened more than five or six technical support issues for HyperFlex. So it's very good for response time and attention, but when I asked to make this upgrade, they tell me that they can't do that. If you want to upgrade or want any service, we can open new tickets. But we open one and then another and the problem isn't solved. 

With HyperFlex, the firmware has some issues. If we can't upgrade, we can't solve some problems and enhance the threshold in this product. We need solutions to problems not to just open more tickets.

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

We did work with previous products to set up a traditional server solution. We switched to Cisco UCS Manager because it is more powerful. We knew about our limitations because we were not familiar with this product and lack some better access to local technical support. We planned to take the UCS Manager course and training to solve these issues.

How was the initial setup?

The installation is very complex. We work with Hypervisor VMware. We study the competitive advantage of different combinations and compatibilities. Because there are so many options this process becomes very complex. Compared to Nutanix, we don't investigate anything. We just click download and install the system. 

From day one when we were initiating HyperFlex, we worked with version 1.9 at the time. After one year, we made the upgrade to 2.0 and then 2.1. After many open tickets and trying many times, we can't upgrade the tool to 2.201. So, we are still trying to get to the point where we want to be with the implementation and it is one year and three months. 

What about the implementation team?

We implemented on our own but for the upgrade with would like to work with assistance. We have not been able to find proper assistance in our area.

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

If someone working with SAP (System Analysis and Program Development) or some other system, I recommend HyperFlex for that infrastructure as a better hardware solution but not the application. If you work with SAP and something like S/4 HANA or anything else, Cisco is a good hardware solution.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Cisco USC Manager a seven because the pricing and quality of the product with the discount from Cisco make HyperFlex a good value compared to other solution.

As we preferred Cisco as a solution at a great price, I think many people will consider it a better option. With some training and support, we can solve the issues we have.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Before choosing Cisco, we did not evaluate other options because we were familiar with the company through other products and their reputation.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
System Specialist at MTN
Real User
A solution that offers lots of functionality, while being stable and highly scalable
Pros and Cons
  • "The solution is highly scalable, mainly because of the templates that make it easy for you to actually edit on the system."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily usually use UCS Manager where we've installed from the ESXI Host and are hosting multiple UCM's.

How has it helped my organization?

There are occasions when we have or have had one of the VM licenses expiring and that required us to quickly create a new implementation of some issues. The solution makes the process easy.

What is most valuable?

If I'm playing with a new host, the most valuable aspect is that those servers can get a host up and running in quickly. 

What needs improvement?

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 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.

They should work to simplify the server creation template.  

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution since 2016.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution feels very stable. I seldom get UCS Manager related issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is highly scalable, mainly because of the templates that make it easy for you to actually edit on the system.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is good, but I find it best when I log a call when the team in America is working so that it gets assigned to someone there. European support isn't as good as the US support.

How was the initial setup?

I wasn't a part of the original setup team, so I can't speak to its level of difficulty. You only need one administrator to handle the solution once it's implemented.

What other advice do I have?

We're using the on-premises deployment model.

It's a good solution, as long as you can maneuver admin paths and are competent in running the day to day support tasks.

The solution is a bit complicated and complex, but the trade-off is you have a lot of functionality.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Senior Network Engineer at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Consultant
It's a great tool for configuring all the features required for servers like storage, compute, and network.

Valuable Features:

It's a great tool for configuring all the features required for servers like storage, compute, and network. 

Improvements to My Organization:

The best thing about UCSM and the UCS B-Series servers is its centralization, which means from one location we can configure storage, network and compute for all the servers that will be using it. It's very easy to add more servers with a very less effort.

Room for Improvement:

So far for me, it's great and is a perfect solution. But the GUI needs some work.

Deployment Issues:

We've had no issues with deployment.

Stability Issues:

We've had no issues with stability.

Scalability Issues:

We've had no issues with scalability.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Technical Specialist at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Vendor
Unification of storage as well as networking and compute and defining them with software (SDDC) are valuable features.

What is most valuable?

Unification of storage as well as networking and compute and defining them with software (SDDC) are valuable features.

How has it helped my organization?

The best product in the market for Cloud business -- CAPEX and OPEX -- will be reduced.

What needs improvement?

Complete integration of the network, and the Nexus layer management and configurations could be improved.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've used it for over five years.

What was my experience with deployment of the solution?

Initial configuration of FlexPod due to the knowledge limitation.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We faced issue with Nexus vem licensing issue which makes our complete DC went isolated in connect

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability wise it was very nice, it would be good if the maximum limitation of chassis for the FlexPod is changed from 32 to 64 – which allows more scalability for the business

How are customer service and technical support?

Customer Service:

It's very good.

Technical Support:

It's very good.

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

No previous solution used.

How was the initial setup?

It was complex due to a limitation in our knowledge.

What about the implementation team?

Through a vendor who had good expertise.

What was our ROI?

It has a good ROI comparatively to all other products/solutions.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

IBM infrastructure with a Microsoft solution.

What other advice do I have?

I strongly recommend that you go with a Cisco UCS solution for a cloud business.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Download our free IT Infrastructure Monitoring Report and find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Zabbix, and more!
Updated: September 2022
Buyer's Guide
Download our free IT Infrastructure Monitoring Report and find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Zabbix, and more!