We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS B-Series and Pure Storage FlashBlade based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco, Dell Technologies and others in Blade Servers."Great security and functionality."
"The most valuable features are monitoring and processing, which can handle a lot of throughput and are more powerful than the HPE series."
"The initial setup is pretty simple and straightforward."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to replace a server with another one, simply by applying the profile"
"The feature that I found the most value is the abstract and stateless capacities."
"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."
"The solution is stable."
"The scalability is very good."
"The main feature I have found to be product replication."
"The snapshots, replication, and the ability to have immutable blades are the most valuable features. You're putting data snapshots out in those blades, and they cannot be touched. Its performance is great."
"It performs well and it is also very fast."
"The product is scalable and easy to expand."
"What I like best about Pure Storage FlashBlade is its object storage functionality, plus it has fast underlying hardware. Pure Storage FlashBlade is also very stable. I find its stability one of its valuable features."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the rewrite speed and the nonstop services."
"The onboarding and integrated monitoring tools are pretty good."
"It is very easy to use, and it is very fast."
"USC Central seems a bit confusing for technicians."
"The solution is difficult to set up."
"Integration with storage could be improved."
"For future improvements, it would be a benefit if the solution could integrate better with products such as Oracle."
"The main issue with this solution is that it is quite vendor-restricted, meaning that when we use third party software, we cannot use all of the available configuration tools or pre-validated design features."
"This model does not support virtualization of the switch."
"This product uses a converged network adapter because it is the only way to provide flexibility with both fiber and ethernet connections."
"The graphic code that UCS can support is limited and less accessible than other systems."
"There is some room for new features related to authentication and integration with Kubernetes, and other solution using S3 Bucket."
"I would like to see the licensing fees improved as well as the price per terabytes."
"An area for improvement in Pure Storage FlashBlade is its price. It could be reduced. The technical support for Pure Storage FlashBlade also needs improvement. It used to be good, with more experienced engineers. Nowadays, it isn't, and it takes longer for support to solve problems."
"I want efficiency. FlashBlade doesn't have efficiency now."
"It would be beneficial if the layer could support the S3 protocol and be container ready in the next release."
"It would be nice if you could store file-based in the same box with the same technology."
"It usually comes down to just what you hit and the value you're getting when you spend the money and license the products. I would always go, "If you want to make things better, lower your price and make your licensing simpler." There's always an opportunity around that."
"The solution is expensive."
Cisco UCS B-Series is ranked 3rd in Blade Servers with 14 reviews while Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 4th in File and Object Storage with 9 reviews. Cisco UCS B-Series is rated 8.8, while Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS B-Series writes "Processing of our system has greatly improved due to the CPU, functionality and security features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "Immutable snapshots, great performance, and simple and easy replication". Cisco UCS B-Series is most compared with HPE Synergy, Dell PowerEdge M, HPE BladeSystem, Super Micro SuperBlade and Lenovo Flex System, whereas Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Pure Storage FlashArray, MinIO, Qumulo, Red Hat Ceph Storage and NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS).
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.
