We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS B-Series and Pure Storage FlashBlade based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco, Dell Technologies and others in Blade Servers."The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is easily scalable."
"The GUI makes is simple to use and deploy."
"The initial setup is simple, and not very complex."
"It's modular."
"The most valuable features are monitoring and processing, which can handle a lot of throughput and are more powerful than the HPE series."
"I like that the hardware is separated from the software definition of the components."
"The Dashboard is quite impressive and is, so far, the best based on my experience."
"It is less time-consuming to deploy the software."
"Pure Storage FlashBlade is user-friendly. It's replication feature is great because it has active replication and active DR. That's the beauty of the product. It's a perfect solution for block storage."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the rewrite speed and the nonstop services."
"We have seen a reduction in the total cost of ownership by around 20%."
"It uses the same platform for connectivity so integration is seamless."
"It performs well and it is also very fast."
"It is very easy to use, and it is very fast."
"The initial setup is pretty quick."
"What I like best about Pure Storage FlashBlade is its object storage functionality, plus it has fast underlying hardware. Pure Storage FlashBlade is also very stable. I find its stability one of its valuable features."
"The pricing could be less."
"It needs a better UI. Cisco makes a great product, but doesn't know how to make a UI."
"The solution is expensive."
"The upgrades could be improved."
"Cisco UCS B-Series competitors have similar features as they do, Cisco needs to make some changes to make their offering better."
"Cisco is expensive and difficult to manage. The product is not intuitive. It also needs to improve storage management and upgrades."
"The UCS manager interface needs to be cleaned up a bit and can be streamlined, but no major complaints."
"The price of this product is too high. They should work to make it more affordable."
"In terms of scalability, it doesn't expand out quite as robustly as some of the others, but it covers 90% of the market in what it does."
"An area for improvement in Pure Storage FlashBlade is its price. It could be reduced. The technical support for Pure Storage FlashBlade also needs improvement. It used to be good, with more experienced engineers. Nowadays, it isn't, and it takes longer for support to solve problems."
"I have not seen ROI."
"I would like to see more deduplication."
"Compared to, for example, Hitachi NAS, the solution is not mature at all. It's just in its infancy as far as technology goes."
"They need better integration with public clouds along with a better hybrid solution."
"The feature that we're waiting on is better integration with the cell services."
"In the realm of micro-services, I think that Pure Storage can do well if they start getting in there and making their arrays more micro-services ready."
Cisco UCS B-Series is ranked 3rd in Blade Servers with 64 reviews while Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 6th in File and Object Storage with 31 reviews. Cisco UCS B-Series is rated 8.6, while Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS B-Series writes "Robust hardware and efficient management of hardware, creating group policies, such as scrub policies and maintenance policies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "A high-performing and scalable solution that improves data performance for S3 workloads". Cisco UCS B-Series is most compared with HPE Synergy, Dell PowerEdge M, HPE BladeSystem, Super Micro SuperBlade and Lenovo Flex System, whereas Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), VAST Data, MinIO, Pure Storage FlashArray and Red Hat Ceph Storage.
We monitor all Blade Servers reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
