HPE BladeSystem Reviews

The most valuable feature is that we're also using HP software, so the BladeSystem fits together nicely with that.

We use a lot of HP products, in fact, and so HP is a big partner of ours. It makes things in our organization run more efficiently and with less interruption when we run the BladeSystem with our other HP solutions.

There could be some improvements that have to do with CPU architecture, but that's not really an HP part. There's some virtualization we'd like to do that would need better CPU design. It is, however, a little bit difficult to move reams above BladeSystem.

We're using the HP Blade C7000 and BL460 plates. As connectivity modules, we're using FlexFabric.

It's deployed fine for us.

The only thing that would be defective or would need to be replaced is just the discs. The plates just keep running and running. They're pretty stable.

We have lot of space to go with new blades and the whole environment is organized, so it's really easy to put in the new hosts, or new Blades in this case, into the new regular machines.

We switched because HP is stable and reliable.

The initial setup is always straightforward.

These are the servers I use to host my virtual desktops and virtual servers. They outperform the older Dell servers that only had one system on them. I have about 10 machines on each physical blade. The HP ilo Management Interface is very useful and user friendly.

Blade servers are fading away. I shouldn't have bought these. Overall value is less than traditional rackmount servers. Scalability is limited; restricted by the chassis.

These work great for what I'm using them for, but they are not future proof. XenServer has great features allowing me to have heterogeneous pools. Blades are a good solution for organizations that have limited space and don't want to virtualize.

Ease of use.

Our requirement is 99.9999% uptime. That is what we have experienced from these servers.

With the technology advancements, both the OEMs improve their products for best performance. I would also prefer additional improvements in thermal design and management of servers.

HPE Servers for seven years (HP ProLiant SL6000) and HPE Blade for five years (BL460c & Rack). 

All in working condition

No issues.

No issues.

The technical support is the best.

We have used SGI, Sun, and IBM and now Fujitsu. The procurement is thru open or limited tender only.

The initial setup is mixed between being straightforward and complex.

We have well-defined process for the technical evaluation of pricing.

We evaluate all the responses to our requirements. After the selection is made for two to three products. Then commercials are checked and the best price solution is selected.

Check the literature and reviews available for the product. Ask and clarify all the queries before freezing on the requirements.

I get the same level of service and perspective for everything. It is a generic experience with respect to what it's used for.

I would like to see all-around fulfillment availability from top to bottom in terms of features. I guess the answer is higher availability.

The stability is pretty good. I'd say it's on par with other vendors in the same category.

It scales fine for tens of thousands of things.

I can’t comment on things that I'm not supposed to.

We were using a multitude of vendors with comparable differences.

We considered the typical ones, the big three: IBM, HPE, and Dell.

I needed a solution because of my economies of scale. I had the demand and a business need.

I would advise colleagues not to rush into settling on a solution. When we were choosing a vendor, we considered price, performance, availability, and engagement.

One of the useful features is the Virtual Connect module as this approach allows me to utilize fewer physical ports to reach the total number of segregated ports that I need, especially for a virtual environment. Also, there is a server profile attached which is similar, but not yet full blown, to stateless computing.

This particular product allows us to mix up the environment - not only x86 but also the HP UX where the critical application were deployed. This particular architecture (BladeSystem) also allows us to have higher density which cannot be reached by traditional rack-mount servers. Currently, the latest trend (hyper converged approach) is still under observation.

The management is great but there are other competitors that are implementing a better approach. Even HP's own latest products have this composable approach, so if there are any changes that I would like to see, they are within this particular area.

I've been using it for two years.

There were no issues with the deployment.

We've experienced no issues with performance. There are several versions that have issues with the hardware that we need to replace and update firmware to fully utilize the blade.

It's been able to scale for our needs.

7.5-8/10 because currently our company has a partnership that allows us to provide services and tech support. We get a great response from the HP team, and our local teams are also ready to help.

We chose this product because of the stability and their market share is quite large. This means that older products come from the same principals that makes it easier to integrate, and the second one is that this particular item is good to implement.

It is quite straightforward, as there is a wizard. I think newbies with simple documentation can perform the initial setup.

If the project is a complex one that includes any other items (storage, network, etc.) I would strongly recommended to hire a vendor team as it is their job to not only initialize the BladeSystem, but also to integrate it with the entire solution.

We also use Cisco UCS and IBM Flex servers.

Keep observing the market as new technologies have emerged, but not all are useful yet. It is good if we have a good relationship with the solution integrator as they may also give feedback.

I especially value the higher consolidation ratio.

This server comes with up to 2TB of memory which allows us to run more virtual machine on single server. We can leverage it for a higher consolidation ratio.

It would be better if the boot time during POST would be reduced.

I have used it for eight years.

I did not encounter any stability issues. It’s a good product.

I did not encounter any scalability issues.

I would give them a rating of 9/10.

We used to deploy IBM Blade Servers. The switch was due to company policy, although IBM products are also good.

The setup is quite easy once you configure the Integrated Lights-Out (iLO) server.

It depends on the order size of other services we select during the procurement phase.

We evaluated Cisco UCS.

It’s advisable to use FlexFabric Interconnect for a converged network.

The HP ProLiant line has proven to be a very durable and reliable product. This is the greatest thing that I love about HP servers. They just work and keep on working. We have HP ProLiant servers which are almost 10 years old and is still working until today.We bought HP ProLiant servers as they offered us the best value for money in our part of the country. HP also has great support countrywide, and we didn't have any problem that the local support could not handle. This for me is the number reason why selected HP ProLiant for our servers in our part of the country. We felt more at ease with HP ProLiant rather than with IBM System X, as HP has better support.

The only con I can think off with using HP ProLiant is the limited parts of the old servers. This is understandable though, as it is also not feasible for vendors to stock parts which might never be sold.There is also this thing about server management. Other vendors like Cisco has really taken leaps and bounds in overhauling server manageability and make it work. HP has had new products as of late, but I think they must have innovated sooner as they are now behind the competition in this regard.

I would definitely recommend HP ProLiant servers. They are very reliable and very easy to configure. Just make sure that you stock-up on parts which you think might not be available any more in the foreseeable future. From experience, stock on the hard disks especially if you are still using the older technology, and buy redundant power supplies as these are the ones that normally fail after years of continuous operations.