We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers and IBM Power Systems based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Rack Servers solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."On the Cisco side, there is a benefit in terms of server management. Cisco provides UCS Manager, which is a multi-tenant site manager. We can manage multiple sites while maintaining disaster recovery, a feature not available on other platforms."
"We have many people in my organization using Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers in the administration."
"The hardware customization capabilities are great."
"The most valuable features of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers are agileness, ease of operation, and manageability."
"The solution is scalable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is performance."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the expansion and replacement of parts."
"It has centralized our server management and allows us to treat servers like a pool of resources instead of discrete devices."
"Some of the most valuable features are the processing power, stability, and security."
"The SMT that they've improved has really helped open up boundaries for other applications that can use it."
"We found working with IBM Power Systems that LPM is the most valuable feature."
"The initial setup is simple and straightforward."
"Power Systems' best features include its user-friendliness and self-checking/self-healing abilities."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"The performance is the solution's most valuable asset. It has one of the highest levels of performance I have ever seen. It's quite remarkable, in that sense."
"What we like the most is the ability to upgrade the scaling of the system itself. Whenever we need extra storage, we can do that. Whenever we need extra memory, we can do that as well. It's fast and it's available."
"I would like to see a little more integration with VMware."
"The solution can be improved by adjusting the cost."
"Definitely the support area needs improving. Especially the time response in case of hardware failure."
"Its accessibility and manageability can be improved. Currently, we have to visit the office to manage it. It should be manageable outside our network. I would like it to be on the cloud."
"The hard drive of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is not very good. I have already replaced three of them."
"Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers can improve by providing customization features to allow us to deploy them on the cloud. For example, we need VMware to allow us to accomplish a cloud deployment."
"The C-Series is not designed to be as scalable. They are designed to have enough RAM and enough CPU on their own side. If you want scalability, it's better to choose the B-Series— the Blade Servers — because those are much more scalable with Fabric Interconnect."
"Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers could improve by adding a wider portfolio because they only have two main categories, the C-220 and 240. There is no wide range of options as other solutions have, such as Dell. Additionally, if it was more flexible with the configuration it would be good."
"The pricing of the product could always be lowered."
"It does not offer the ability to run any X86 or X64 Intel architecture-based application on Power Systems. There are a lot of applications, lots of business use cases that do not support this architecture as of now. If somehow application tasks can be ported on to IBM Power Systems, that would be a big improvement."
"The scalability process should be simplified."
"In the next release, I would like to see additional graphical dashboards to help the administrators access information more easily."
"Its management can be made easier because it is not easy to manage. They should also find a new way for migrating from an old Power Systems to a new one. The migration process is currently very complicated. It should be made easier to scale. Currently, its scalability depends on the initial sizing, whereas in Nutanix HCI, you can add whatever you need and whenever you need it."
"Price and complexity related to the management of the solution are areas of concern in the solution where improvements are required."
"IBM Power Systems could improve by having a cloud feature."
"I would like to see firmware available to all of the systems."
More Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is ranked 5th in Rack Servers with 29 reviews while IBM Power Systems is ranked 4th in Rack Servers with 69 reviews. Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is rated 8.4, while IBM Power Systems is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers writes "The VIC card is the most important feature". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Power Systems writes "A solution with minimal downtime and quick recovery time in the event of a sudden or unexpected crash". Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is most compared with Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers, HPE ProLiant DL Servers, Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers, Dell XR2 Rugged Server and HPE Apollo, whereas IBM Power Systems is most compared with Intel Server System, Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers, Oracle SPARC Servers and HPE ProLiant DL Servers. See our Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers vs. IBM Power Systems report.
See our list of best Rack Servers vendors.
We monitor all Rack 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.
