CISO at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 5
Jul 14, 2025
The Cisco UCS B-Series system is very adaptable as it can be set up as a standalone, expanded, and operated in a cluster mode. Flexibility in scalability supports business growth. My clients use Cisco UCS B-Series servers for a range of databases, including Oracle, SQL, and MySQL, but also accommodate cloud databases and big data such as Cassandra and MongoDB. To ensure high levels of client comfort and satisfaction, projects often commence with a proof of concept before scaling to larger operations, accommodating OLTP, OLAP needs, and vast data warehouses. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Cisco UCS B-Series a nine.
Cisco UCS B-Series is Intel-based and reliable as a brand. It's an excellent choice for customers who purchase both the hardware and software licenses for management and maintenance. We are satisfied with the price and would recommend it to others. For the overall solution, I rate it ten out of ten.
I would recommend that they include more technical content and ensure there is sufficient documentation available. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
I would recommend Cisco UCS B-Series for those looking for a scalable blade server solution. I advise trying the product to see if it meets their needs. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
Pre-Sales Consultant at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
Reseller
Top 5
Sep 25, 2024
We sometimes recommend Cisco UCS B-Series over Dell for midsize enterprises, government institutions, financial sectors, and other various types of companies. It depends on the situation and the customer's preference. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.
Corporate IT Infrastructure Manager at a pharma/biotech company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
Jul 16, 2024
Managing Cisco UCSB B-Series has been straightforward. While we've also used HPE in the past, both platforms offer similar manageability features. The documentation and support have been comprehensive. I rate it a nine out of ten.
Cisco UCS B-Series manages various processes, including handling payments for over 650,000 growers, running group financials, managing human resources, and operating our main ERP system, SAP. The servers' resilience was particularly impactful. Even during power outages, the servers resumed operations from the last saved point without human intervention. The enhanced processing speed also allowed us to complete tasks that took two days in just one hour. The automation capabilities enhanced efficiency and facilitated integration with our networking components, particularly since we also used Cisco switches. The servers' security was reliable, and formal training on Cisco products made management easier. I rate the product an eight.
Speaking about how the tool can improve computing efficiency in data centers, I feel that, ultimately, there are other kinds of hardware or servers that Cisco provides. From a management perspective, certain aspects can be incorporated to help users understand their current standing. It would be good if certain larger configurations could also be made suitable for the tool to suit the needs of multiple customer bases. For virtualization needs, the product works well. I have dealt with certain virtualization environments using - Cisco UCS B-Series. As of now, the tool is fine. Cisco UCS B-Series recently got registered with Nutanix, one of the market's HCI platforms. Nutanix can run on Cisco. Cisco UCS B-Series' direction is right. I don't think any further improvement is required in the tool right now. The integration capabilities of the product are okay. I haven't seen any challenges when installing the tool in an environment. I think that the tool supports multiple hypervisors. Speaking about the feature that has improved our company's data center operation, I would say that the Cisco brand name provides our organization with the benefits we need from the product. I believe that manageability is one crucial aspect of the tool, considering that it is pretty easy to manage. Performance-wise, some improvements have been introduced in Cisco UCS B-Series. Whenever somebody evaluates and goes ahead with some traditional setup in their environment, along with HP and Dell, they can also consider Cisco as a part of it because it has become more cost-effective and competitive presently. Networking-wise, the tool is pretty strong, and it operates as a brand that actually helps with the support offered to customers. The support offered by Cisco adds a lot of confidence for the clients. I feel that Cisco is doing a lot of innovation in order to offer scalability and flexibility to adopt future technologies. I believe Cisco users might see a lot more solutions that get introduced in the market that might become more and more compatible with many products in the future. In the future, I think that users will see AI and other related aspects run pretty well in a Cisco environment. I would say that the benefits and value of the use of the product stem from the brand name attached to Cisco products. Cisco's support when you use Cisco UCS B-Series is good. In the networking space, Cisco has been a leader for a very long time, and the same kind of credibility is what you can expect when you consider Cisco UCS B-Series. Considering the availability of the products from competitors, I rate the tool a seven out of ten.
Cisco UCS B-Series enables easy integration with existing infrastructure. The deployment process is well organized, including the basic foundation and design. It has very good management capabilities. Integrating iOS and firmware management and comprehensive inventory tracking allows us to check and log the information through a single dashboard. There is no need to purchase any external software for insights. It is a good solution. I rate it an eight out of ten.
We use Cisco because of its VPN. I will recommend the product to others. It is easy to use and easy to connect. Overall, I rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten.
We have a team of around 50 people to deploy and maintain the solution. I would recommend the solution to other users. Overall, I rate the solution ten out of ten.
My recommendation and advice in this matter totally depend upon the requirement and the nature of the business. For example, in the banking sector, with a heavy data workload on the premises and a need for high availability, I would definitely recommend Cisco for an on-premises environment. I might have the option with Dell, but I would compare Dell and Cisco. Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten because the hardware is much more robust. But they have not expanded as per the user requirement. Firstly, it should be more user-friendly. Secondly, it should move to automation from the user's manager's point of view. It should be more user-friendly, and deployment should be easily done through automation.
Cisco makes it possible for its users to work with the new series of its products, which is Cisco's M6 series blade servers, and Cisco also allows for a lot of enhancements to be made. It is a fine solution for big customers. Considering the multiple use cases for which the solution can be used, others who plan to use it can consider purchasing and deploying it. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.
I rate the solution a seven out of ten. It should have KVM connectivity similar to Dell and HP. Also, HP has a storage blade that helps connect monitors in case of network issues. We can plug in and access the keyboard and mouse to start with the task. It is not possible with Cisco Infrastructure.
New users need to definitely understand how the UCF manager works. They need to understand InterSites, fabric interconnects, and how everything connects both up links to the northbound core switches and make sure all the connectivity is correct. Connectivity is a big issue. If you don't have the right connectivity configured specifically for the UCS manager with the FIs and also the fabric modules coming off the chassis, there will be a lot of issues. I've seen a lot of attack-related issues going forward. Users need to make sure that they have everything configured correctly. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
Overall, this Cisco Blade is really good. My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to purchase the support agreement. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
This is a product that I recommend. If somebody instead chooses to implement a Dell, then they will have a converged system or will be using NetApp. This is much more complex than setting up a hyperconverged system. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.
Cisco is a huge company that can support a lot of services and has the most powerful website, which means its systems are the most stable. I would advise potential customers to use and enjoy it because it is the greatest experience. I would give this solution a score of ten out of ten.
VMware Software Engineer at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Oct 11, 2021
We use both cloud and on-premises deployment models. I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. I'd recommend the solution to other users and other organizations.
We're a customer and an end-user. Our current version is an older version. Right now, we are considering replacing it with the newest one. I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. We've been pretty happy with it overall. I would rate it at a nine out of ten.
Implementation and Support Engineer at PRACSO S.R.L.
Real User
Jun 3, 2021
We're a Cisco partner. We are dealing with the latest version of the solution. I can't speak to the exact version number. I can recommend the solution wholeheartedly to other organizations. I would really recommend it due to the fact that it's a really stable technology. Also, it can produce a return on investment for organizations as well. On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the product at an eight. We've largely been quite pleased with its capabilities.
IT Infrastructure Manager at a tech company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Apr 15, 2021
Before you buy infrastructure like this, I would recommend some training. It'll help to get really good training in infrastructure management. For example, in my case, a quick overview when I started to manage the infrastructure definitely helped. It's very hard because at the beginning you are a little lost. The infrastructure is easy to manage, but it would be better if you take time before you install the infrastructure to learn more. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco UCS B-Series a nine.
Head Of IT Infrastructure and Support at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Feb 2, 2021
I wanted to try out Cisco products because most of the big industries use them such as banks, IT, and telecommunications. Cisco itself produced the server and at the time I researched more about Cisco and then I want to try it. This is why I invested in a tool from Cisco. Additionally, I plan to implement level IP2, HyperFlex soon. I would recommend this solution for the financial sector and big industry enterprise companies that can invest with Cisco long-term. The scalability, high availability, and security all combined is a good offering. I rate Cisco UCS B-Series a nine out of ten.
Network Security Manager at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Nov 6, 2020
My advice for anybody who is considering Cisco UCS is that if it's within your budget, I recommend it because they are popular in the market and it is easy to find experts. Overall, this is a good product. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
Sr. Operations Engineer at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Oct 19, 2020
If there are other organizations considering the solution, I'd strongly advise that they get training on the management side. It's very important to do this in order to successfully implement and use the product. On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate this solution at a seven. It's good, however, it could use a simpler management structure. Cheaper licensing would go a long way as well. The UCS isn't the expensive part. It's more the Microsoft and VMware and the cost of running that.
Senior Principal Systems Engineer at a pharma/biotech company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Sep 16, 2020
Advice that I might want to give to someone considering the product is that I would say they really have to know their own use case to determine whether UCS is applicable as a solution for what they need. The B-Series is really meant for data center deployment. I would not propose or suggest it for small or medium enterprises simply because the initial investment is quite high. You need to get a server interconnection if you get a chance. And if you are not looking to potentially deploy a large number of servers in the near future, then B-series is really not necessary — it is overkill. On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate the product as a nine-out-of-ten. To make it 10, the user-friendliness needs to be improved. Right now the user experience really detracts from the technical abilities of the product. The users need to have too much technical know-how. Cisco should make administration much easier and more straight forward. Maybe there could be some automation and translation of all the operations so that the user does not have to be so technically adept to operate it.
Sr. Network Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Sep 13, 2020
I haven't had experience with others series, like the C-Series. I hope they are good but so far, after three, four years, this has been good and we haven't had any issues. I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.
Consultant at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Consultant
Jul 18, 2018
My advice to a colleague looking at this or a similar solution would be to test it. When we started, Cisco UCS was the first solution on the market and the only one that provided certain capabilities hardware-wise. It was the one with the most cores per CPU and it was the one with the most memory per blade server. Of course, now there are other vendors in the market. If I were to start the search process right now, I would consider Cisco UCS, but also other vendors like Dell and HPE, which are making new blade servers. They are coming up with different solutions and are catching up to the market. Until there is something really new on the market, like UCS had when they started, UCS is facing some competition. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. Two points go to the UI, which is lacking. Also, the way you can actually switch from one system to another doesn't allow for the easy transfer of all of the server definitions.
Based on Intel Xeon processor E7 and E5 product families, Cisco UCS B-Series Blade Servers work with virtualized and non-virtualized applications to increase: Performance, Energy efficiency, Flexibility and Administrator productivity.
The Cisco UCS B-Series system is very adaptable as it can be set up as a standalone, expanded, and operated in a cluster mode. Flexibility in scalability supports business growth. My clients use Cisco UCS B-Series servers for a range of databases, including Oracle, SQL, and MySQL, but also accommodate cloud databases and big data such as Cassandra and MongoDB. To ensure high levels of client comfort and satisfaction, projects often commence with a proof of concept before scaling to larger operations, accommodating OLTP, OLAP needs, and vast data warehouses. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Cisco UCS B-Series a nine.
Cisco UCS B-Series is Intel-based and reliable as a brand. It's an excellent choice for customers who purchase both the hardware and software licenses for management and maintenance. We are satisfied with the price and would recommend it to others. For the overall solution, I rate it ten out of ten.
I would recommend that they include more technical content and ensure there is sufficient documentation available. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
I recommend focusing on the relationship with the customer as it plays a more significant role than the technical specifications in our region.
I would recommend Cisco UCS B-Series for those looking for a scalable blade server solution. I advise trying the product to see if it meets their needs. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
We sometimes recommend Cisco UCS B-Series over Dell for midsize enterprises, government institutions, financial sectors, and other various types of companies. It depends on the situation and the customer's preference. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.
Managing Cisco UCSB B-Series has been straightforward. While we've also used HPE in the past, both platforms offer similar manageability features. The documentation and support have been comprehensive. I rate it a nine out of ten.
Cisco UCS B-Series manages various processes, including handling payments for over 650,000 growers, running group financials, managing human resources, and operating our main ERP system, SAP. The servers' resilience was particularly impactful. Even during power outages, the servers resumed operations from the last saved point without human intervention. The enhanced processing speed also allowed us to complete tasks that took two days in just one hour. The automation capabilities enhanced efficiency and facilitated integration with our networking components, particularly since we also used Cisco switches. The servers' security was reliable, and formal training on Cisco products made management easier. I rate the product an eight.
Overall, I would rate it a seven out of ten.
Speaking about how the tool can improve computing efficiency in data centers, I feel that, ultimately, there are other kinds of hardware or servers that Cisco provides. From a management perspective, certain aspects can be incorporated to help users understand their current standing. It would be good if certain larger configurations could also be made suitable for the tool to suit the needs of multiple customer bases. For virtualization needs, the product works well. I have dealt with certain virtualization environments using - Cisco UCS B-Series. As of now, the tool is fine. Cisco UCS B-Series recently got registered with Nutanix, one of the market's HCI platforms. Nutanix can run on Cisco. Cisco UCS B-Series' direction is right. I don't think any further improvement is required in the tool right now. The integration capabilities of the product are okay. I haven't seen any challenges when installing the tool in an environment. I think that the tool supports multiple hypervisors. Speaking about the feature that has improved our company's data center operation, I would say that the Cisco brand name provides our organization with the benefits we need from the product. I believe that manageability is one crucial aspect of the tool, considering that it is pretty easy to manage. Performance-wise, some improvements have been introduced in Cisco UCS B-Series. Whenever somebody evaluates and goes ahead with some traditional setup in their environment, along with HP and Dell, they can also consider Cisco as a part of it because it has become more cost-effective and competitive presently. Networking-wise, the tool is pretty strong, and it operates as a brand that actually helps with the support offered to customers. The support offered by Cisco adds a lot of confidence for the clients. I feel that Cisco is doing a lot of innovation in order to offer scalability and flexibility to adopt future technologies. I believe Cisco users might see a lot more solutions that get introduced in the market that might become more and more compatible with many products in the future. In the future, I think that users will see AI and other related aspects run pretty well in a Cisco environment. I would say that the benefits and value of the use of the product stem from the brand name attached to Cisco products. Cisco's support when you use Cisco UCS B-Series is good. In the networking space, Cisco has been a leader for a very long time, and the same kind of credibility is what you can expect when you consider Cisco UCS B-Series. Considering the availability of the products from competitors, I rate the tool a seven out of ten.
Cisco UCS B-Series enables easy integration with existing infrastructure. The deployment process is well organized, including the basic foundation and design. It has very good management capabilities. Integrating iOS and firmware management and comprehensive inventory tracking allows us to check and log the information through a single dashboard. There is no need to purchase any external software for insights. It is a good solution. I rate it an eight out of ten.
We use Cisco because of its VPN. I will recommend the product to others. It is easy to use and easy to connect. Overall, I rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten.
We have a team of around 50 people to deploy and maintain the solution. I would recommend the solution to other users. Overall, I rate the solution ten out of ten.
My recommendation and advice in this matter totally depend upon the requirement and the nature of the business. For example, in the banking sector, with a heavy data workload on the premises and a need for high availability, I would definitely recommend Cisco for an on-premises environment. I might have the option with Dell, but I would compare Dell and Cisco. Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten because the hardware is much more robust. But they have not expanded as per the user requirement. Firstly, it should be more user-friendly. Secondly, it should move to automation from the user's manager's point of view. It should be more user-friendly, and deployment should be easily done through automation.
Cisco is compatible with Mac and Dell. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
Cisco makes it possible for its users to work with the new series of its products, which is Cisco's M6 series blade servers, and Cisco also allows for a lot of enhancements to be made. It is a fine solution for big customers. Considering the multiple use cases for which the solution can be used, others who plan to use it can consider purchasing and deploying it. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.
It is a good tool. I would rate it a nine out of ten.
I rate the solution a seven out of ten. It should have KVM connectivity similar to Dell and HP. Also, HP has a storage blade that helps connect monitors in case of network issues. We can plug in and access the keyboard and mouse to start with the task. It is not possible with Cisco Infrastructure.
I would rate the product a seven out of ten. We have two administrators for the product. The tool is a good product but maintenance is not easy.
New users need to definitely understand how the UCF manager works. They need to understand InterSites, fabric interconnects, and how everything connects both up links to the northbound core switches and make sure all the connectivity is correct. Connectivity is a big issue. If you don't have the right connectivity configured specifically for the UCS manager with the FIs and also the fabric modules coming off the chassis, there will be a lot of issues. I've seen a lot of attack-related issues going forward. Users need to make sure that they have everything configured correctly. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
I give the solution a ten out of ten. We have four people that use the solution and one person who is primarily responsible for any related UCS.
We plan to upgrade the Cisco UCS B-Series in 2024. I recommend this solution to others. I rate Cisco UCS B-Series a ten out of ten.
I rate this solution a ten out of ten. I recommend the solution to others because they will gain from using it, and it is very reliable.
On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cisco UCS B-Series at eight.
I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
Overall, this Cisco Blade is really good. My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to purchase the support agreement. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this solution at ten.
This is a product that I recommend. If somebody instead chooses to implement a Dell, then they will have a converged system or will be using NetApp. This is much more complex than setting up a hyperconverged system. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.
I rate Cisco UCS B-Series an eight out of ten.
Cisco is a huge company that can support a lot of services and has the most powerful website, which means its systems are the most stable. I would advise potential customers to use and enjoy it because it is the greatest experience. I would give this solution a score of ten out of ten.
We use both cloud and on-premises deployment models. I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. I'd recommend the solution to other users and other organizations.
We're a customer and an end-user. Our current version is an older version. Right now, we are considering replacing it with the newest one. I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. We've been pretty happy with it overall. I would rate it at a nine out of ten.
We're a Cisco partner. We are dealing with the latest version of the solution. I can't speak to the exact version number. I can recommend the solution wholeheartedly to other organizations. I would really recommend it due to the fact that it's a really stable technology. Also, it can produce a return on investment for organizations as well. On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the product at an eight. We've largely been quite pleased with its capabilities.
Overall, this is an excellent product.
Before you buy infrastructure like this, I would recommend some training. It'll help to get really good training in infrastructure management. For example, in my case, a quick overview when I started to manage the infrastructure definitely helped. It's very hard because at the beginning you are a little lost. The infrastructure is easy to manage, but it would be better if you take time before you install the infrastructure to learn more. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco UCS B-Series a nine.
I wanted to try out Cisco products because most of the big industries use them such as banks, IT, and telecommunications. Cisco itself produced the server and at the time I researched more about Cisco and then I want to try it. This is why I invested in a tool from Cisco. Additionally, I plan to implement level IP2, HyperFlex soon. I would recommend this solution for the financial sector and big industry enterprise companies that can invest with Cisco long-term. The scalability, high availability, and security all combined is a good offering. I rate Cisco UCS B-Series a nine out of ten.
I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
My advice for anybody who is considering Cisco UCS is that if it's within your budget, I recommend it because they are popular in the market and it is easy to find experts. Overall, this is a good product. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
If there are other organizations considering the solution, I'd strongly advise that they get training on the management side. It's very important to do this in order to successfully implement and use the product. On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate this solution at a seven. It's good, however, it could use a simpler management structure. Cheaper licensing would go a long way as well. The UCS isn't the expensive part. It's more the Microsoft and VMware and the cost of running that.
Advice that I might want to give to someone considering the product is that I would say they really have to know their own use case to determine whether UCS is applicable as a solution for what they need. The B-Series is really meant for data center deployment. I would not propose or suggest it for small or medium enterprises simply because the initial investment is quite high. You need to get a server interconnection if you get a chance. And if you are not looking to potentially deploy a large number of servers in the near future, then B-series is really not necessary — it is overkill. On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate the product as a nine-out-of-ten. To make it 10, the user-friendliness needs to be improved. Right now the user experience really detracts from the technical abilities of the product. The users need to have too much technical know-how. Cisco should make administration much easier and more straight forward. Maybe there could be some automation and translation of all the operations so that the user does not have to be so technically adept to operate it.
I haven't had experience with others series, like the C-Series. I hope they are good but so far, after three, four years, this has been good and we haven't had any issues. I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.
I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.
Right now we haven't encountered any issues on our system that could result in our KPI being impacted.
Our customers are very happy people.
My advice to a colleague looking at this or a similar solution would be to test it. When we started, Cisco UCS was the first solution on the market and the only one that provided certain capabilities hardware-wise. It was the one with the most cores per CPU and it was the one with the most memory per blade server. Of course, now there are other vendors in the market. If I were to start the search process right now, I would consider Cisco UCS, but also other vendors like Dell and HPE, which are making new blade servers. They are coming up with different solutions and are catching up to the market. Until there is something really new on the market, like UCS had when they started, UCS is facing some competition. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. Two points go to the UI, which is lacking. Also, the way you can actually switch from one system to another doesn't allow for the easy transfer of all of the server definitions.