Dell PowerEdge R-Series Reviews

We use this solution for our on-premises infrastructure to mainly provide office support and data storage.

We use it for data storage and it allows for easy access to the data on-premises. It has helped increase staff productivity.

PowerEdge is one of the top solutions when it comes to the security features that it provides including firmware, drift protection, and systems management.

It's a pretty nice system. You can log in to iDRAC, you can look at the logs, the temperature, etc. Essentially, all of the metrics of the server are there, so you can get a complete view and immediately know what's going on.

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.

I've used PowerEdge Rack Servers on and off for about 20 years.

It's very stable. I would give it a ten out of ten. The system is pretty redundant, so we never really have any downtime.

We have about 250 users. It's used 90% in the company, in terms of our infrastructure. We do not plan to increase usage because we're moving more things to the cloud. We're trying to reduce our server footprint on-premises.

Dell's technical support is pretty good. I'd give them a ten out of ten.

We've always switched between Dell and HP, depending on the current state and the cost. The reason for switching is primarily the cost involved.

The initial setup is not intuitive. The first one took a while, but after that, we were done within an hour.

When deploying the PowerEdge solution, we were able to use the automated server and OS deployment features, but I had to talk to Dell support. They had to walk me through it. However, once you do it once, it becomes very easy.

We implemented it ourselves with help from Dell's technical support.

For deployment and maintenance, we need one person.

When you compare public cloud solutions to PowerEdge in terms of cost, initially the cost of Dell servers or Dell technology was really high. However, right now it's on par and maybe even cheaper when we use Dell hardware. If we don't swap it out in three years and stretch it to four or five years, then we can get even more of an ROI versus cloud cost.

We've always chosen HP or Dell depending on the year, the product, and any promotions offered by the respective companies. We generally use Dell laptops, so by default we often go with Dell servers as part of the ecosystem.

I highly recommend Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers; they are solid. If you do your due diligence and do your homework or your janitorial work, they'll never break.

I would give this solution a ten on a scale from one to ten.

I use a mixture of versions of this solution including R440 and R430.  I also use FX2S for the blade chassis and FC630 and 640 for the actual blade servers.

We use the blade solution as a host cluster environment for virtualization of multiple servers and the standalone R440 and 430 for best practice when we don't want to necessarily complete virtualization. We use physical servers in different locations in order to have different firewall contexts, so we can push data across. We use the physical servers as simulated distant ends in a test environment out at the actual sites.

This solution has helped us reduce our rack footprint. It reduced our power consumption including size and weight. For example, we could increase the number of systems we were deploying in Iraq if we needed to. 

The solution decreased the time it takes to deploy systems due to needing less hardware. When we started to manage all of our servers in a cluster, it increased our oversight management. Ease of management with a smaller hardware footprint has equaled faster deployment.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the fact that it is a reliable server and does the job we implemented it to do. 

We are leaning away from this particular product because Dell's VxRail solution makes us buy four nodes at a time which is not scalable. Other solutions such as Cisco offer more innovation on this front. 

The switching for this solution is lagging behind other products. Cisco has built the best iOS that other solutions need to match. Dell has recently done an overhaul to allow networking switches but it still can't scale the way we need it to. 

I have been using this solution for seven years. 

This is a stable solution. 

Blade servers are not scalable anymore.

The initial setup is not complex but it is counterintuitive, specifically the chassis. The FX2S chassis holds up to four half widths blades and has a pre-built two-module network card and eight ports that mirror each other.  

The PCIe slots on the back of the chassis are hardwired and challenging to set up.

We did not use the automated server of OS deployment features. We installed the hardware and then installed the software manually. We are a dark site. Dell could be a little bit more friendly to dark site management. There's a huge customer base out there that just cannot utilize a lot of their solutions in a classified environment.

The pricing for this solution is reasonable. We pay a basic premium with a military premium on top of that. 

This solution has met my needs. We have not run with the latest versions of this solution due to security concerns. 

This solution has helped me to view the health and status of our environment in a user-friendly way. The TPM features have helped us a lot because, from a configuration management standpoint, there are trusted platform modules that operate consistently.

For anyone considering this solution, I would recommend looking into all the finer details to understand how it could be integrated. Ensure every facet of the solution is going to meet your needs.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. 

We primarily used the solution for the servers. It's a node among many in a multiprocessor, supercomputer environment. It's a very verified application. The customer uses a lesser file system, which means that one file system is shared among the entire installation. You're not going to see that very often in your career unless you're in that business. It's a multi-node, high-performance computing file system. It's Linux based.

It fit the requirements of the client, that's really all that it was for us. It could deliver the IOPS and the local storage that was required. It could have been anybody else, Lenovo, IBM, HP, etc. We were Dell's number one reseller in Canada and probably worldwide. We got very favorable terms and that also helped with the decision.

The only way you could improve it is, for the purpose of HPC installations, is IOPS and the only way to improve it is to get a more powerful machine to deliver more IOPS. Basically, you need more CPUs and you need more RAM and you need a faster backbone. We were running on 100 gigabits Infiniband.

Until they get new technology and density, it would be nice to see four nodes in a one-year package instead of a three-year package.

I'm recently retired, however, I did work with the solution on one of my last projects which lasted a few months.

The solution delivers what it promises. You look at the specs and it delivers them. If it doesn't deliver you move onto another model.

There's really nothing special about it, and Dell doesn't make servers that are any better than anybody else's. The prime reason we chose it is that it delivers what it promises to deliver in terms of IOPS and the price right for us because when you're a platinum level reseller for a server company, they will give you very favorable terms especially in this time of a pandemic, hardware sales are down across the board for the entire industry.

It's very scalable. That's the whole idea. When you want to add more computation power to the platform you just throw in another act of compute nodes and storage.

I've never used technical support. Out-of-the-box it works, and if it doesn't, then the client deals with it directly. The equipment is sold to them so they own the serial numbers and they own the service contracts, so if anything went wrong during the installation the client would take care of them, not us.

We've worked with HP, Cisco, Lenovo, and IBM in the past. We always choose the solution that makes the most sense for our clients.

We handed over the complete installation in September. We started in August. It takes time. You're coming into an empty room. You have to have power, you need the AC for the equipment there that has to be moved out. It takes time. The racks were pre-populated in Toronto and shipped to Montreal, and then in Montreal, they were set up and powered. We had liquid cooling and radiators on the rear of the cabinet for the heat.

We've done many of these installations, and it's pretty routine. There's nothing complex about it. The complexity is mostly that there are so many key parts in terms of getting it delivered on-site. There are so many parts from so many different vendors and there are penalties if you don't deliver on time. Nobody wants to pay penalties.

I didn't deal with the pricing, and therefore don't know the exact costs. 

However, they would compete with pricing on the market. Even if HP made an equivalent platform, and they do, we wouldn't get good terms. They're all pretty well in the ballpark range in cost and the variation. The list price might be 10%. They know what the competition is doing so they don't want to price themselves, the values, off the list of potential. If I'm looking at servers that deliver so much IOPS and they price themselves out, HP knows what Dell is doing and Dell knows what HP is doing.

My company partners with Dell.

I'm recently retired, however, I did most of the infrastructure, backup storage, and high-performance computing. I was in pre-sales. I was a solution architect. Therefore, I'm not an end-user.

We only used Dell for the servers. We used Seagate for storage. They have hard drives. They've been in the hard drive business for 40 years.

My biggest piece of advice for those considering the solution is to make sure they are delivered on time. When clients are spending $50 million for an installation and you say it's going to be ready September 15th, it better be ready September 15th. One of the main reasons stuff's not ready is because parts are missing. That means you can't deliver a complete solution. If you're missing a box of spare hard drives, they're just spares, they're not preventing the installation, however, they're missing, and therefore you haven't delivered the product.

Overall, I'd rate the product ten out of ten.

We primarily utilize Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers as hosts for virtual machines.

We opted for the OCP primarily due to its exceptional modularity. With compute nodes and storage nodes sharing the same form factor and rack, it simplifies maintenance tasks. Any necessary adjustments can be made seamlessly without the need to unplug cables, as everything is contained within the rack itself. This user-friendly design streamlines operations, particularly for individuals with limited training in server management.

Our older PowerEdge servers consume significant amounts of power due to their age.

In terms of high performance, there hasn't been any improvement or decline. We have sufficient redundancy to tolerate the loss of multiple nodes without any impact.

In terms of productivity, we have the capability to interface directly with the servers when necessary, eliminating the need for remote access.

There is potential for enhancement in terms of its overall upgradeability.

I have been using it for five years.

In terms of stability, overall it has been satisfactory, although we encountered some issues due to outdated hardware. At one point, we experienced failures likely stemming from aging components, such as a faulty CPU that led to the shutdown of certain virtual machines.

It fulfills its intended functions, but we haven't identified any advantages to the additional features. Overall, I would rate it seven out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution is for the virtual machines for our PBX which is installed on it. We are customers of Dell EMC and I'm the telecommunication department head. 

I've never had any down time with this solution and it's very user friendly.

I'd like to see improvement with the analytics reports, they could be more useful than they currently are. 

I've been using this solution for three years. 

We haven't needed to contact technical support but we use PBX support for our servers. We're waiting to receive another four servers that we'd like to deploy. 

The initial setup was straightforward, we had consultants do this for us with a 3-person technical team and it took one day. We currently have over 100 users. 

When we were looking for a solution we also evaluated HPE ProLiant.  

I rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

My clients use PowerEdge servers for Hyper-V by Microsoft and VMware machines. They're running ERP and CRM applications and agents for backup systems licensing models. The models we use include 730, 630, 620, 220, and 740.

The configuration and BIOS management are flexible. It's easy to install 10 GB network cards on the rack. They have a good selection that simplifies the network connections.

It takes a long time to deliver the hardware. The riser cards can be better. The riser cards are where the PCI cards connect. They need to have more than two riser cards in the server because it can be difficult to connect sometimes. 

I have been using PowerEdge Rack Servers for about 10 years.

PowerEdge servers are stable in general, but sometimes clients report having problems with the RAM. 

The scalability is good.

I rate Dell support seven out of 10.

Neutral

PowerEdge servers are easy to set up. You need about two or three people, including a specialist and an engineer, to maintain the solution. You usually need an engineer plus a specialist in Hyper-V or VMware.

I think the price of these servers is good.

I rate Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers nine out of 10. I recommend the product.

We use Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers powered by Intel as production servers. In recent years, we have also used them for backup.

• They give us peace of mind; we sleep well at night. 
• The Intel Xeon processors have helped to improve performance.
• We have also seen a very small reduction in unplanned downtime.
• In addition, they have improved backups and my options to do the things I need to do, without hassle.

The solution is reliable.

The time it takes the machine to boot up, when I turn it off and on, could be quicker.

I've been using Dell rack servers since about 1995.

Support is very good if we need it. If we have any problem with the equipment, the Dell team works with us to fix everything. My experience has been that they want to solve all the problems, even if doing so takes time. They are on it until it's fixed.

Positive

We have only used Dell. We are comfortable working with Dell, the price is fine, and the Dell people are very cooperative.

Deployment is simple. Within one hour the server is up and working.

The pricing is fair enough.

We use this solution as a host for clusters. We use 750, 740s, and 730s.

PowerEdge is able to run the latest high-demand applications for our use case. They host our clusters and facilitate the building of environments. 

We also like the iDRAC feature for monitoring system data and providing analytics. The newer iDRAC is a lot better than the older versions. 

The management features of this solution have been most useful.

We have experienced some challenges with iDRAC when upgrading firmware.

We have been using this solution for a couple of decades. 

I would rate the support for this solution a seven out of ten. 

Neutral

The initial setup was straightforward. 

Implementation was done as a combination of the vendor and our internal reps.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

We use this solution for our virtual servers.

The maintenance for this solution could be improved. 

I have been using this solution for five years. 

This is a stable solution. 

It took one hour to set up this solution. We have 20 staff members using it. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.