Perhaps the processor needs some improvement in terms of processing features. If I remember correctly, the Intel Xeon processor shipped with the Dell PowerEdge M is the 6426Y. This processor is a 16-core processor that can handle around 32 threads. Now, the HP server we are considering has a 6430 processor, which is 32 cores. It can handle 64 threads. So it's twice as much as the Dell PowerEdge M. However, the memory module, the DDR4-4800, is the same. But according to reviews and online sources, the memory performance is much better on the Dell PowerEdge. That's where the confusion arises. Another area of improvement could be scalability.
They are pretty much all the same in terms of what this solution versus competitors offers. Cisco is number one, HP Synergy is number two, and this solution would be number three. I'm more into PowerEdge R-600, 700, and 800 series instead of blades. Technical support is not good.
Red Hat Certified Trainer /Examinar at a educational organization with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 10
2023-01-25T14:10:13Z
Jan 25, 2023
There is currently a new generation of Dell Blade Systems, so it requires time to transition to the new generation. However, the current version of the solution we are working with meets our requirements.
Dell PowerEdge M needs to run AMD CPUs on it. For future releases, I would like to see the Ethernet connectivity updated. It is a very old technology. Dell has alliances with other companies that make their networking components, like Cisco and Brocade, but the choice is very slim. Dell also has their own networking products which are good however, there needs to be a better selection of networking components.
Sr, Storage Engineer at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2020-12-22T19:02:00Z
Dec 22, 2020
Their features and product overall are comparable to others on the market, nothing stands out. The company should have either been more clear with the packaging, or a little bit more forthcoming with what you needed, what is in the package, and what came with it.
The Dell PowerEdge M-Series blade servers address the challenges of an evolving IT environment by delivering leading enterprise classfeatures and functionality. The M-Series delivers a unique array of options configured to meet the needs of your IT environment both now and in the future.
Multiple blade form-factor choices.
Long life cycle providing better life cycle management and improved TCO.
Modular I/O switches for future scalability.
Breakthrough fan...
The firmware updates for the product need improvement.
Perhaps the processor needs some improvement in terms of processing features. If I remember correctly, the Intel Xeon processor shipped with the Dell PowerEdge M is the 6426Y. This processor is a 16-core processor that can handle around 32 threads. Now, the HP server we are considering has a 6430 processor, which is 32 cores. It can handle 64 threads. So it's twice as much as the Dell PowerEdge M. However, the memory module, the DDR4-4800, is the same. But according to reviews and online sources, the memory performance is much better on the Dell PowerEdge. That's where the confusion arises. Another area of improvement could be scalability.
They are pretty much all the same in terms of what this solution versus competitors offers. Cisco is number one, HP Synergy is number two, and this solution would be number three. I'm more into PowerEdge R-600, 700, and 800 series instead of blades. Technical support is not good.
There is currently a new generation of Dell Blade Systems, so it requires time to transition to the new generation. However, the current version of the solution we are working with meets our requirements.
The solution could be improved by continuously looking for ways to make it better.
Dell PowerEdge M needs to run AMD CPUs on it. For future releases, I would like to see the Ethernet connectivity updated. It is a very old technology. Dell has alliances with other companies that make their networking components, like Cisco and Brocade, but the choice is very slim. Dell also has their own networking products which are good however, there needs to be a better selection of networking components.
Their features and product overall are comparable to others on the market, nothing stands out. The company should have either been more clear with the packaging, or a little bit more forthcoming with what you needed, what is in the package, and what came with it.
In terms of improvement, it should also offer a hyper-converged option.