Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

HPE Synergy vs Supermicro SuperBlade comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on May 25, 2025

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 Synergy
Ranking in Blade Servers
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
90
Ranking in other categories
Composable Infrastructure (1st)
Supermicro SuperBlade
Ranking in Blade Servers
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Blade Servers category, the mindshare of HPE Synergy is 21.3%, down from 21.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Supermicro SuperBlade is 5.8%, down from 7.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Blade Servers
 

Featured Reviews

CarlosArdila - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps grow horizontally or vertically within one box or chassis
The initial setup is very easy. We deployed this in two days, including installation, system setup, firmware upgrades, configuration, and network connection. By the next day, we were already deploying virtual machines. We initially began with the Blade system. As the migration to SAP HANA approached, it seemed prudent to upgrade our hardware. Consequently, we facilitated their transition from the Blade system to Synergy. Subsequently, we collaborated closely with the SAP consultancy company to oversee the migration process, ensuring seamless integration of all workloads and sub-environments. We have four people working on the deployment, including a project manager, two specialists, and one tech support.
Gergely Lakos - PeerSpot reviewer
With many servers in one, these blade servers are easier to manage
The service could be improved by faster servers, more widely available VMs, and more storage in one place. Then, in the event of a blade failure, we could start our VMs on another blade in a couple of minutes. This is why we wanted to buy storage. But now, we want to buy a twin server with 24 VMware discs to create test storage. The next product release should allow more servers to be controlled simultaneously.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It gives us ease of use. It's nice because we don't have to mess with networking once it's set up. Once it's done, we just put another blade in and go from there. We don't have to go back in, run more cables, deal with more data center stuff. We stick a blade in, use the server profile template, build out a server profile from that, and it just goes."
"The temporal value of it. If I only need a particular amount of compute for a specific period of time during business hours, then at night, I'm running a bunch of batch jobs, or doing something else, that ability to swap a profile, swap templates, and have compute assigned to something else, saves significant amount of money. As long as you are tying it into the automation and orchestration layers, it becomes much easier to do."
"For me, this is the best frame server technology available in the market. We can compare it to Cisco UCS. It is robust and stable, and it is also easy to deploy and scale. Their support is the best."
"The flexibility to link them together and configure them gives us the ability to scale out easily, to add more compute resources as needed... The way that they're scalable and flexible means we can add additional servers in quickly... We're not spending a lot of time doing procurement and building of physical servers."
"It's a bit easier to manage than the C7000s."
"The hyper-converged infrastructure where everything is stateless is valuable. Basically, you have your compute storage and networking management."
"We like that the solution can be arranged for an all-in-one single pane of glass, something our customers find important."
"We have more control over the firmware and how we are managing our physical servers."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The ability to save resource is a key feature."
"I think the IPMI is a really good feature."
 

Cons

"They were not so deep into integration with VMware."
"This solution could be improved by increasing the speed on the conversion adapters. It should be 100 gigs."
"The power consumption is very high, and there should be a more efficient way of reducing the power requirements while maintaining high performance."
"The solution must concentrate on improving the product quality."
"I would like the ability to have my storage components accessed from any other frame across the backplane. If we have a storage module and we run out of space in that frame, it'd be nice to be able to share it across the frames. You can do it with hyperconverged. Why can't you do it with Synergy?"
"I would really like a way to validate the firmware in my specific environment before trying to deploy it. Those were the issues we had early on with firmware upgrades, particularly around certificates. All in all, having some level of confidence aside from it just having been tested generically would help. Something more specific to my environment would be very helpful."
"The pricing can be improved as it is a costly solution due to sanctions in Iran."
"They have not improved their product since it was purchased."
"Supermicro blade servers are not the best. They could improve in scalability but are not really scalable right now."
"The solution does not scale well."
"There is a lack of support for fiber channels currently that needs to be added."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution has reduced our IT infrastructure costs because we have had to buy less services than we used to."
"The platform that we run Synergy on is all virtualized. Our primary cost is likely VMware."
"Nutanix was really hard to implement, and it was very pricey compared to what we get from Synergy."
"We don't have to pay for Synergy because it's part of our plan."
"We do a biannual renewal. I know how much that renewal is, but I don't know how much it breaks down to be just Synergy, since we have our VMware, all of our physical equipment, etc. all rolled up into one renewal, which is a little over $300,000 every two years. However, only a subset of that is the Synergy product."
"We outright purchased Synergy."
"The biggest cost is the VMware licensing."
"There was at least about a 20 percent savings in cost over our purchase based on the purchase price of the compute modules themselves versus what we've had to pay before. It was significantly less."
"The product is not expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Blade Servers solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 do you like most about HPE Synergy?
It is a good product for hypervisors.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for HPE Synergy?
Pricing in the blade server market is very competitive, with HPE offering a competitive price. Competitor products include Dell's MX series and Cisco's UCS X series.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
SuperBlade
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

HudsonAlpha, Virgin Media, EMIS, United
Prace
Find out what your peers are saying about HPE Synergy vs. Supermicro SuperBlade and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.