We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS Manager and HPE OneView based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"It is more robust than other solutions. So, the stability is good."
"We can configure the Cisco UCS Manager, the profiles and interactions with the resource we manage."
"Cisco UCS has different layers of security, and you can do multiple installations of your LIAMs on top of the server and Blade. You can install VMware, Windows Server, Hyper-V, etc."
"The interface is ergonomic and native. We can use UCS Manager to do all the configurations for the servers, including storage, networking, and all the other components we need inside the fabric. It's simple and flexible."
"The most valuable features are flexibility and management."
"What I like most about Cisco UCS Manager is the ease of administration. It also allows the central management of maintenance, installation, and configuration activities."
"The hardware is very powerful and it is a stable solution."
"When one server fails, we can attach the service profile to a new server, which saves a lot of time."
"OneView provides a single console, which is manageable without physical access."
"Just the ability to provision the servers with storage and network everything within one interface, not having to go into multiple interfaces to provision those pieces."
"It monitors all our servers, and if there is any problem it straight away sends us an alert. If It's a faulty component, we can see it from there. It sends an alert."
"Deploys faster new virtual services."
"The remote support automatically logs service calls and support cases with HPE, which is really good."
"The best part is that you can integrate a two-way network. Earlier we could not manage the storage and ToR switch. Now we can create a LAN with our storage without any interface. In terms of switch management, it is now easy to understand the current configuration. It provides centralized management. It provides a single pane, and you can easily do all updates in one shot. It is a great product."
"I don't have to use CD-ROMs or anything like that to provision the servers."
"If you have a lot of devices, like we do, then you have to have one single pane of view, otherwise we lose too much time. So, we needed this type of solution."
"Upgrading the firmware is a difficult procedure."
"The installation and upgrade sytems need to be improved."
"Its user interface can be improved. It can be more user-friendly."
"I would like to see Cisco UCS optionally work as a hyper-converged system because right now, it only operates as a converged system."
"Cisco UCS Manager should have a simplified deployment in the sense of not having multiple machines, demilitarized zones, and on-premise options."
"Cisco UCS is expensive compared to others. The Cisco UCS Chassis is more expensive than a standalone server, but some companies require standalone servers because of their production load and affordability. You need to pay more if you require more features on the Blade or if you need more ports on the switch."
"In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to their security."
"The solution's pricing is high and could be reduced."
"I would like to see support for things that aren't in the current generation. We have a lot of 7th and 8th generation hardware."
"I had some minor difficulties with upgrading, but the solution still works fine."
"We ran into a couple of issues here and there with the baselines for the firmware and not having enough space on the appliance itself to be able to have more than two baselines."
"There was a feature called HPE cloud manager, but now it is owned by Micro Focus. HPE should make a cloud optimizer again."
"Integration could be improved. Sometimes OneView doesn't identify physical hardware."
"Technical support is not very good. The engineers do not know a lot about the product, even when asked simplistic questions."
"It needs more reporting capabilities."
"The solution could add storage, integration services, and end-to-end support for Cisco switches or other competitor products."
Cisco UCS Manager is ranked 29th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 21 reviews while HPE OneView is ranked 17th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 80 reviews. Cisco UCS Manager is rated 8.0, while HPE OneView is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS Manager writes "Used to manage servers, monitor or manage firmware upgrades, and push policies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE OneView writes "Provides firmware compliance and the ability to connect to iPO". Cisco UCS Manager is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Nutanix Prism, Zabbix, Datadog and Moogsoft, whereas HPE OneView is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Dell CloudIQ, Zabbix, Lenovo XClarity Orchestrator and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our Cisco UCS Manager vs. HPE OneView report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.
