We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers and HPE ProLiant DL Servers based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Rack Servers solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack is the use of databases, such as MySQL."
"The server can be configured easily."
"The product doesn't take up too much space on the rack and I like that."
"The solution is stable."
"Its hardware is really reliable. We also like Cisco for its support."
"The technical support from Cisco is fine."
"The most valuable features of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers are integration and customization."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is server management."
"The initial setup was easy."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is HPE Integrated Lights-Out (iLO)...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"There is a lot of extra storage. I am only using half of what I need."
"I am impressed with the tool’s stability."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"iLO, in particular, helps us manage the servers better, especially as a lot of them are remote from where the IT staff are. We have some locations where we just have not got IT presence at those locations, so iLO really helps with that."
"It's easy to upgrade, and it is very easy to take care of the firmware upgrades."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"Some customers have complained about delivery time. So, the main weakness is the lead time."
"On the contact center and video conferencing, I would definitely like to see more AI features. The AI features are key for us. You will find a lot of them in the cloud-based solution, but in the on-premises solution, they're hardly there. I would like to see the same AI features that are there in the cloud-based Cisco UC."
"The C-Series is not designed to be as scalable. They are designed to have enough RAM and enough CPU on their own side. If you want scalability, it's better to choose the B-Series— the Blade Servers — because those are much more scalable with Fabric Interconnect."
"In the version we need to use, the manager is still reliant on a full Java install on a Windows OS. This is inconvenient and problematic if you have multiple management tools on different versions of Java or if you move to a machine without the appropriate Java environment."
"Its accessibility and manageability can be improved. Currently, we have to visit the office to manage it. It should be manageable outside our network. I would like it to be on the cloud."
"The pricing is too high and no discounts are available for our country."
"Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers could improve by adding a wider portfolio because they only have two main categories, the C-220 and 240. There is no wide range of options as other solutions have, such as Dell. Additionally, if it was more flexible with the configuration it would be good."
"The product must add customer-friendly monitoring features."
"The initial configuration process could be simpler."
"It's scalable but we are switching to workstation for some software because the CPU speed isn't fast enough anymore."
"In DL 500 systems, the flow of air is not good enough, and some components get overheated. IBM systems have better airflow and scalability. We have a data center that has limited physical space. Therefore, we need to maximize the processing or compute systems that we use. In HP servers, such as DL 500, there are only four processors, whereas IBM servers, such as SR 916, have eight processors. We don't get any support from HP because of our geographical location. We solve all problems ourselves by doing research on the internet. It would be good to get HP support."
"HPE ProLiant DL Servers are not scalable."
"We found that the extensions could be improved and the price could be a little lower."
"They should continue to maintain the stability that is there."
"The price of HPE ProLiant DL Servers could improve."
"There are concerns about the HPE team in the Southeast Asia region, suggesting a need for improvements in terms of responsiveness. There have been instances where the response time was slow, causing challenges during urgent situations. Its stability also needs to improve."
More Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is ranked 5th in Rack Servers with 29 reviews while HPE ProLiant DL Servers is ranked 2nd in Rack Servers with 156 reviews. Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is rated 8.4, while HPE ProLiant DL Servers is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers writes "The VIC card is the most important feature". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE ProLiant DL Servers writes "Good availability and management console with good reliability". Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is most compared with Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers, Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers, Dell XR2 Rugged Server, HPE Synergy and IBM Power Systems, whereas HPE ProLiant DL Servers is most compared with Dell PowerEdge Rack Servers, Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers, HPE Apollo, IBM Power Systems and HPE Synergy. See our Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers vs. HPE ProLiant DL Servers report.
See our list of best Rack Servers vendors.
We monitor all Rack 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.
Another good question to consider is, how deeply are security and anti-tampering features built in? With the advent of Gen 10 servers HPE is implementing this right down in silicon whereas the rest of the marketplace is still using firmware features to try to accomplish this. This is arguably too late in the process to be able to guarantee what BIOS code you are actually running, what back doors have been slotted in or what spyware ‘features’ have been embedded!
Also, look where HPE are going with Synergy. They have taken a huge architectural leap forwards and the roadmap is hugely impressive.
I don´t know in deep Cisco servers, but if you compares a HP and a CISCO with identical hardware (same chipset, processor, amount of RAM,..), the benchmark are very similar.
In my humble opinión, it is very important ask for the warranty and tech support. And most important: if you need someday add more hardware to your server, you must know before if you don´t buy it to the server manufacture, you loose the warranty.
It is very tipical some server manufacturer sell very cheap their machines but when you need to add more memory and/or hard drives, it is obligatory buy them to the server manufacturer... an very expensive.
I would suggest visiting spec.org as there is a wealth of information available there. The benchmarks are run by the vendors but within guideline and industry verified. There are many different benchmarks available through this site depending on what you are really interested in.
Hope this helps
Depending on what kind of workload you are looking for, you can find some info. / results from www.spec.org. Since Cisco UCS and Proliant DL are commonly used servers in enterprise, there should be test results of various benchmark on these server models.
As per my experience, CISCO UCS C-series is having scalability issue but for HPE ProLiant DL RACk server is good in terms of scalability. HPE tech support is much better than CISCO UCS.
I suggest checking the key benchmark sites directly – TPC-C, SAP etc. Each benchmark is designed to test a specific system capability.
www.tpc.org
global.sap.com
I have attached the URL’s. The SAP testing is most revealing for overall systems performance and scalability. The most recent certifications show Cisco UCS servers eclipsing their HPE counterparts by notable margins. Standard Proliant systems are lower in total lines processed than Cisco units, and you have to move up to the HPE Synergy line to beat lower end Cisco C240 servers. However, the higher end 4-way Cisco C480 handily beats Synergy.