No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

HPE BladeSystem vs HPE NonStop comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

HPE BladeSystem
Ranking in Blade Servers
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
140
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
HPE NonStop
Ranking in Blade Servers
12th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Blade Servers category, the mindshare of HPE BladeSystem is 8.0%, down from 14.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HPE NonStop is 5.3%, up from 4.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Blade Servers Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
HPE BladeSystem8.0%
HPE NonStop5.3%
Other86.7%
Blade Servers
 

Featured Reviews

TA
CTO at Miraj
Centralized modular platform has improved data center management and supports mission-critical workloads
The main area for improvement I see is the training process. When you use anything, how easily it is to manage is very important in hyper-converged solutions. If you compare it with VMware, it is very familiar. HPE Converged, however, is very large to understand for a new person. I am talking about training and management perspective, and user management. A system integrator and any system engineer who will operate and manage the system should find it easy to understand any configuration part and understanding part, which is currently a little bit tough. In Virtual Connect, we need some improvement. If we are going to move to hybrid, we need to easily move VM transactions from on-premises to cloud. We require a good, more easy process for day-to-day activities. Performance-wise, HPE BladeSystem is good regarding its ability to support mission-critical applications. However, reliability is all dependent on the core and memories, which will centrally control the entire blade and hyper-converged. We require more reliable things because if something goes down in the controller and center control, it is very tough to manage. We require a centralized image that will be replicated to any other device immediately, and all configurations and everything will come as soon as possible.
Roni Wijaya - PeerSpot reviewer
Vice President of It Operations at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
With a perfect record for uptime, the solution ensures a return on investment
Since it is a legacy tool, there is a need to change it for flexibility. I think now it has improved because the security is very good. It is very secure for the performance of the machine critical application service, and it is very good. I don't know how to speak more on improvement needed because it's a good enough tool. However, depending on the application, it's limited. Not a lot of applications run on HPE NonStop. It is not flexible because I know that because of the compatibility of Java with HPE NonStop. When we are using Java, the performance is not good.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The scalability has been good."
"Allows immediate access for server management, allows immediate detection of the access logs, secures access to the console, and provides reliable administration."
"One of the most valuable features I have found to be the enclosure."
"When comparing the HPE ProLiant DL Servers to the HPE BladeSystem, the HPE BladeSystems are compact and need less space for installation, can provide the same computing as the HPE ProLiant DL Servers in the same unit, and are a lot easier to manage."
"The solution is very easy to use; it's user-friendly and simple to navigate, the space conservation it provides is excellent, it helps compact the server, the product is quite stable, its performance is reliable, and the solution can scale so a company can expand it if it wants to."
"The solution is very fast and the power consumption is great."
"Currently, we're using HPE BladeSystem BL460, but we're planning to migrate to the Synergy System as part of our strategy since the OEM support for the BL460 will eventually end. The most valuable features are its high computing capability and availability. Additionally, the ability to manage all resources from a single dashboard using the OneView solution that comes with the HP Converge system is incredibly beneficial. The efficientand unique environment makes it an excellent fit for our needs."
"The stability is pretty good, and I'd say it's on par with other vendors in the same category."
"The stability of HPE NonStop is good."
"Because we're able to get immediate support, this prevents downtime and directly impacts cost savings."
"Feature-wise, the most valuable one is the fact that it has 100 hundred percent uptime every year. Secondly, it is stable."
"This is the standard for reliability and fault-resilience."
"It is a nearly perfect product, although it also has some restrictions and short comings."
"The HPE NonStop solution is rated with the highest level of availability in the industry."
"We don't have any issues with the stability of HPE NonStop."
"They've been very reliable since we started using them in 1978, but we're going to replace them in a few years."
 

Cons

"The early stages weren't as smooth as they should have been."
"Higher bandwidth interconnects could be introduced."
"All around, it would be nice if the solution were cheaper."
"HPE BladeSystem can improve by providing the latest generation processor engine, such as the I-Flex processor."
"The profiles need a complete rework, the way the profiles and networks are assigned to the blades isn’t user friendly and is often a hindrance."
"There were stability issues in the early versions, Blades G1."
"There could be more management capability to work with integrations."
"There have been some hardware failures with them. These failures have since been solved by HPE support partners."
"Currently the NonStop platform doesn’t support virtualization of servers or CPU’s. Only storage."
"It is not flexible...Not a lot of applications run on HPE NonStop."
"I would never advise someone to buy or to implement the new NonStop because it's hard to find skilled people."
"There were some scalability issues. When we decided to migrate an application or port application, the limitations of these servers did not help us."
"The initial setup is complex. You need the help of a consultant for it to go smoothly."
"NonStop (formerly known as Tandem) in the Guardian OS could use another, friendlier macro language."
"The NonStop Support Center is very good, with an occasional bump in the road."
"HPE NonStop could improve by having infrastructure management."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I need to pay for the license, and it is expensive. We make yearly payments."
"The price of HPE BladeSystem could improve. They need to reduce the price to be able to compete better with other vendors, such as Dell."
"When you purchase HPE BladeSystem you have to pay for the support service. The first three years are covered under the warranty, and for any further support, you have to pay annually. When comparing the cost of HPE BladeSystem to other vendors, the fees are less expensive."
"The pricing is competitive."
"BladeSystem is a little bit cheaper."
"There is a one-time purchase for the HPE BladeSystem."
"Their licensing program is pretty simple."
"We have been satisfied with the price. However, there are additional costs for support."
"HPE NonStop is definitely on the higher end."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive, I rate the pricing an eight."
"The price of the solution is too high. If they lowered the price substantially it would open up more opportunities. It's considered a replacement for the old 9000 boxes of HP. If it had a lower price, we would be able to compete in the financial, and other sectors and other solutions such as Terraform. Having a high price makes other solutions more attractive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Blade Servers solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
13%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise40
Large Enterprise104
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

How would you choose between HPE's Bladesystem and Synergy?
For me, choosing between HPE’s Bladesystem and Synergy came down to which solution was more powerful, reliable, and stable. It turns out Bladesystem was the winner. Bladesystem is excellent because...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for HPE BladeSystem?
With around 19 years of exposure in working with various servers, including HPE, I encounter challenges in identifying reasonable prices during the setup cost and licensing process, especially for ...
What needs improvement with HPE BladeSystem?
The main area for improvement I see is the training process. When you use anything, how easily it is to manage is very important in hyper-converged solutions. If you compare it with VMware, it is v...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

HP ProLiant BL Series Servers, HP ProLiant BladeSystem
HP NonStop, HPE Integrity NonStop
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

EMIS Health
Bankart, Capital Securities Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about HPE BladeSystem vs. HPE NonStop and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.