We performed a comparison between HPE Blade system and HPE Synergy based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, HPE Synergy is a better choice. Our reviewers find that Synergy offers better support, stability and scalability, and it is worth the complex setup.
"The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management. It is easy to communicate from the server to the storage."
"It is easy to scale if you have the licensing."
"The solution uses a smaller space in our data centers. It uses less feeder and network cable, which reduces costs."
"HPE BladeSystem is very easy to use."
"Its ease of management, consolidation, connectivity, power, and cooling are the most valuable features."
"I really appreciate the integrated Onboard Administrator, the iLO (Integrated Lights-Out) modular network, and the SAN Switches."
"The solution is issue-free and works almost flawlessly."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"We're able to provision different applications, different demonstrations, add cloud-like speeds on-prem, which is unheard of in the industry."
"The manageability is its most valuable feature. It is a fully managed platform, which is very simple to manage."
"The product enables the centralization of all administrative tasks."
"The solution has decreased our deployment time by 10 to 20 percent."
"It's very scalable. We like the idea that we can put four chassis in one of our racks, and we can connect up to 25 chassis, so the scalability to us, and being able to sync all those into one management portal, is unheard of. You can't really sync that many blades and chassis together in any other platform."
"The initial setup is straightforward. The infrastructures as code enables you to fill out the configuration before you even deploy it, then it is just a one-touch deployment."
"The temporal value of it. If I only need a particular amount of compute for a specific period of time during business hours, then at night, I'm running a bunch of batch jobs, or doing something else, that ability to swap a profile, swap templates, and have compute assigned to something else, saves significant amount of money. As long as you are tying it into the automation and orchestration layers, it becomes much easier to do."
"The solution's greatest strengths lie in its ability to maintain a high availability and combine networking with hyper channel connectivity into a single component."
"HPE BladeSystem that we are using is currently very old. It's not too good. We haven't renewed it. I would like the solution to have more updates."
"The connectivity speed could be improved."
"HPE has a replacement system called Synergy, though it’s a more high-end system than the old C7000."
"The integration and price of HPE BladeSystem could be improved."
"Currently, in the case of a disk failure there is a need to remove the whole bay and as a result, to disconnect all the other disks."
"I would like OneView to go over the current limit of 40 instances."
"I would prefer to have changes in the compatibility of the blade servers with the new ones designed by HPE, as the top team's version does not have it."
"The problem is that when want to expand with a new chassis, you have to do everything manually. It's not automatic."
"We had an issue during the initial setup with the 40 Gigabyte cards. They weren’t working, so we had to work really closely with HPE support to get them to work."
"Continue the path of integrating OneView into a single product. A lot of different people have different OneView experiences based on which product they have used it for."
"Sometimes there are firmware or software difficulties when connecting between networks or with storage."
"There is always room for improvement. Based on our use cases, I don't believe there are any additional features required."
"The main challenge we faced was that when it was installed it just did not work. There were faulty components and it took weeks of troubleshooting to find the faulty components, get them replaced. Getting help from HPE was difficult. Nobody knew about the product. It was a brand-new product and people had not been trained on it. That part was not a great experience."
"The expansion was complex, because adding a second frame onto the original frame caused an outage."
"I'd get the firmware to be a little more secure and a little more streamlined."
"I would like more storage with this solution, because we still need 3PAR or other storage outside the box for the amount of data that we have."
HPE BladeSystem is ranked 2nd in Blade Servers with 134 reviews while HPE Synergy is ranked 1st in Blade Servers with 85 reviews. HPE BladeSystem is rated 8.6, while HPE Synergy is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of HPE BladeSystem writes "Very reliable, expands well, and is pretty simple to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE Synergy writes "Local hard drives are not needed for the i3S module that boots to any operating system". HPE BladeSystem is most compared with Cisco UCS B-Series, Dell PowerEdge M, Super Micro SuperBlade and HPE Superdome X, whereas HPE Synergy is most compared with Dell PowerEdge M, Cisco UCS B-Series, HPE Apollo, HPE ProLiant DL Servers and HPE Superdome X. See our HPE BladeSystem vs. HPE Synergy report.
See our list of best Blade Servers vendors.
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.
