We performed a comparison between Dell EMC Poweredge and Lenovo Thinksystem Rack servers based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Lenovo Thinksystem Rack Servers came out as the superior solution. Although it is more pricey, it is easier to use and performs better.
"The PowerEdge systems management frameworks have enabled us to progress towards full automation when it comes to managing PowerEdge."
"This is a stable solution."
"Managing it is straightforward, and the scalability aligns well with the needs of our organization."
"Compared to the other vendors and generations, this one tends to be more user-friendly, so you spend less time trying to get where you want to go."
"Ease of use."
"They are very stable. They are rock solid. I am happy with them."
"The core strength of Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers lies in their expansive connectivity and seamless integration with other offerings within the Dell product ecosystem."
"The iDRAC for remote access is the most useful feature because it's built into the machine. I can reboot them without having to be there physically. We do a lot of what we do remotely, and it handles that fine."
"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."
"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."
"It is a stable solution."
"Ensures high availability, better hardware management, and support for active features."
"Its performance and the local support of Lenovo in my city are the most valuable features. Its performance is the best, and its user interface is also very easy."
"It's very power-efficient and allows you to access the rack server directly without accessing the operating system on that server."
"I would say the stability of the system itself would be the biggest advantage."
"The product is very user-friendly."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"One of the things that I've noticed is that over time, the system degrades, meaning that little things don't work. For example, the hard drive would need to be replaced or iDRAC would not be functioning properly. We may have to flash the firmware. It is not like some other hardware where it just runs without issues for four or five years. With Dell, generally, there are little hiccups here and there."
"They could improve the time between new versions of the product."
"Currently, the solution does not have the in-process memory encryption technology."
"Their support can be better. The speed of their support is not always great because the access to the data centers is sometimes complicated, so there is back and forth."
"On the MX7000 platform, they should continue to release better and faster blades."
"The server itself is good, but sometimes, the salesperson forgets to sell us the right controller. It is related to sales. It is not related to the technical part."
"I do not have any input as such. There can be a bit more expansive AI portfolio, but I have not worked on any AI projects with Dell, so I might not be up to date in knowledge."
"The solution's initial setup was complicated."
"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."
"It is quite an expensive product. Its price can be improved."
"It was complex to get this started because the Lenovo and VMware are not very compatible. We had to get some updates in order for it to be implemented."
"I do not have any notes for improvements."
"Upgrading firmware is easier in Dell than in Lenovo."
"The power consumption needs to be optimized in Lenovo."
"There are other solutions that are less expensive."
More Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers Pricing and Cost Advice →
Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers is ranked 1st in Rack Servers with 136 reviews while Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers is ranked 3rd in Rack Servers with 27 reviews. Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers is rated 8.8, while Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers writes "Storage solution used to host databases and support a company with more than 10,000 users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers writes "Reliable with an easy setup and good support". Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers is most compared with HPE ProLiant DL Servers, Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers, IBM Power Systems, HPE Apollo and Huawei FusionServer RH Series Rack Servers, whereas Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers is most compared with HPE ProLiant DL Servers, IBM Power Systems, Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers, Dell PowerEdge FX and Dell PowerEdge XE Servers. See our Dell PowerEdge 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.