We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS B-Series and HPE BladeSystem based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Blade Servers solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The Dashboard is quite impressive and is, so far, the best based on my experience."
"The ratio in terms of the number of units and the number of servers that we can get each chassis is quite good."
"The platform has valuable features for management and good monitoring tools. It provides efficient insights."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the service profile."
"In terms of the flexibility of the tool to adapt to technology needs, I think it is a very good solution."
"The architecture of this solution is very valuable; it has five traffic interconnects, and uses a network highway so bandwidth is never an issue."
"The Boot from SAN function is good because using OTV, we can boot the device from any remote location."
"The density of the BladeSystem, that we can keep adding blades as we need more VMs."
"They are reliable, and it's relatively easy to manage them. They also regularly provide patching for the servers."
"It's very scalable."
"The product has a lot of options for checking servers and IoT ports using artificial intelligence."
"I really appreciate the integrated Onboard Administrator, the iLO (Integrated Lights-Out) modular network, and the SAN Switches."
"With just one cable, for redundancy let's say two, you can feed sixteen servers in a single c7000 chassis."
"The solution is very fast and the power consumption is great."
"Cabling complexity and volume have been reduced."
"The price of this product is too high. They should work to make it more affordable."
"Next generation support for VMware needs to be introduced as it does not support eighth-generation VMware."
"The pricing could be less."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved and made cheaper."
"It should be more user-friendly."
"The configuration is a bit complex, as it requires very high technical expertise to apply it."
"The initial setup process is complex."
"The initial setup is not easy."
"Currently, in the case of a disk failure there is a need to remove the whole bay and as a result, to disconnect all the other disks."
"It may be coming to its end of life."
"If the hardware offered higher efficiency, that would be an ideal situation for our company."
"The problem is that when want to expand with a new chassis, you have to do everything manually. It's not automatic."
"It would be nice if the solution were cheaper."
"The scalability is limited because you only have a 16-server by chassis."
"There is always room for improvement everywhere with the HPE BladeSystem."
"There could be more management capability to work with integrations."
Cisco UCS B-Series is ranked 3rd in Blade Servers with 64 reviews while HPE BladeSystem is ranked 2nd in Blade Servers with 134 reviews. Cisco UCS B-Series is rated 8.6, while HPE BladeSystem is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS B-Series writes "Robust hardware and efficient management of hardware, creating group policies, such as scrub policies and maintenance policies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE BladeSystem writes "Very reliable, expands well, and is pretty simple to set up". Cisco UCS B-Series is most compared with HPE Synergy, Dell PowerEdge M, Super Micro SuperBlade, Pure Storage FlashBlade and Lenovo Flex System, whereas HPE BladeSystem is most compared with HPE Synergy, Dell PowerEdge M, Super Micro SuperBlade, HPE Superdome X and Pure Storage FlashBlade. See our Cisco UCS B-Series vs. HPE BladeSystem report.
See our list of best Blade Servers vendors.
We monitor all Blade Servers reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
