We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers and Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers 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."We have many people in my organization using Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers in the administration."
"It has centralized our server management and allows us to treat servers like a pool of resources instead of discrete devices."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is performance."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is server management."
"In terms of the features that I have found most valuable, that is basically the hardware, which is more dynamic."
"Excellent server solution with incredible network throughput."
"The solution is reliable and easy to use."
"The most valuable features of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers are integration and customization."
"I like everything about this solution. It is a very good server, with excellent availability. The size of the power is adequate and the low heating is beneficial."
"The product is designed to make adding RAM and disk space easier for users."
"I would say the stability of the system itself would be the biggest advantage."
"We appreciate the stability and easy mountings of all the machines. We have some direct connections with IBM, Lenovo, and other companies, and we get close support from them."
"The IMM tool is great because we can upgrade different views and device versions very quickly. We can upgrade everything from a single point through a single dashboard, which is great for us because we also have Lenovo storage. Lenovo ThinkSystem also has Xclarity built into the system."
"It is a stable solution."
"The initial setup of Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers is straightforward. The process of implementation took me approximately two to three days. We only had to install the hardware for the installation."
"One of the main advantages of this tool is its ease of use, as it is a GUI-based tool needing a simple and easy configuration...It is a stable solution."
"The product must add customer-friendly monitoring features."
"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."
"There is very little scalability for the cluster. If you need a higher availability, there is a user limitation. So that is the low side."
"The only thing I would change is to provide more proactive support."
"I would like to see a little more integration with VMware."
"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 price of the solution is problematic, not the solution itself. It could be less expensive."
"There is room for better integration with other brands."
"The power consumption needs to be optimized in Lenovo."
"I do not have any notes for improvements."
"From our side, our budgets are really not there. The availability of cash is a little bit limited. We buy as much as we can, If it was less expensive, we could buy more."
"The RAID Management and the RAID Configuration tools need to be improved."
"The performance of the solution could be better."
"To be frank, the technical support from Lenovo's team needs improvement. There seems to be a lack of support, and it is important for Lenovo to address this issue."
"HP has a riser inside, but Lenovo does not have a riser. It would be good to have a riser with Lenovo. The GUI of the system is really bad. HP has a very good UI for smart memories and everything inside, but in Lenovo, we have a black-and-white UI. HP right now manufactures a server with scalable SP1 and SP2 on a single machine, which is not the case with Lenovo. They are changing the machine. For SP 1, there is one server, and for SP2, there is another server, which is really bad. In HP, we can use two models of processors in a single case. Lenovo should also be improved to have SP1 and SP2 scalable processors simultaneously on a single machine. They should not release another machine. This issue is also there in H3650 severs. They are all inside, but only V3 CPU or only v4 CPU can work, whereas, in HBG9, we can deploy V3 and V4 simultaneously. Lenovo also needs to advertise more because I can't see advertisements anywhere."
"Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers availability could improve. We have been waiting two months for one server."
More Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is ranked 5th in Rack Servers with 29 reviews while Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers is ranked 3rd in Rack Servers with 27 reviews. Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is rated 8.4, while Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers is rated 8.4. 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 Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers writes "Reliable with an easy setup and good support". Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is most compared with Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers, HPE ProLiant DL Servers, Dell XR2 Rugged Server, HPE Apollo and IBM Power Systems, whereas Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers is most compared with Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers, HPE ProLiant DL Servers, IBM Power Systems, Dell PowerEdge FX and Dell PowerEdge XE Servers. See our Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers vs. Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers 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.