Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers Reviews

The primary use is for virtualization.

They are currently used for VMware management.

On the Cisco side, there is a benefit in terms of server management. Cisco provides UCS Manager, which is a multi-tenant site manager. We can manage multiple sites while maintaining disaster recovery, a feature not available on other platforms.  That's about the added value.

For the Cisco side, improvements could be made in terms of scalability, costing, available capabilities, or support for multiple types of hard drives. 

Cisco currently supports a limited range of hard drives, so if possible, they can maintain further overhead rates and broaden support for various types of hard drives.

Another areas of improvement include pricing and scalability. 

We have worked with Cisco UCS for around six years. Some of the servers are still running.

We are stable right now. We are using 50 users. We use Cisco UCS C240 M5 Rack Server.

There is very little scalability for the cluster. If you need a higher availability, there is a user limitation. So that is the low side.

We have around 5 to 16 customers using this solution. They are mainly in the educational sector. 

Cisco's technical and learning support is better than Dell. Cisco provides a learning platform for technical guidance and free access for deployment engineers within our subscription, unlike Dell, where we have to pay for every enrollment.

The setup process of the UCS is simple. But the one setting it up must know how to use the UCS manager.

The deployment doesn't take a long time. UCS provides two options. One is from the local console. The other one is from the UCS manager.

So, from the UCS manager, we can autopilot to deploy into multiple servers at the same time. It takes around 20 minutes to deploy all the hypervisor solutions again.

The deployment process is very simple. We can get the firmware level and the operating system from the website. So we download it from there. And, using the console or the UCS manager, we can enroll it.

We have a Cisco-certified team responsible for managing the Cisco side.

Our customers don't pay for licenses. As a service provider, we cover the costs. They only pay for the services they use.

The subscription fee is on an annual basis. We always use annual. There are no extra costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

Evaluate the price and look for scalability. Cisco's cost has increased post-COVID, so exploring other options is advisable.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten due to its scalability and expansion.

We provide the solution to our customers as per their requirements. Our customers are using the server, and they highly recommend it.

The server can be configured easily.

The product must add customer-friendly monitoring features.

I have been working with the solution for more than nine years. I am using the latest version of the solution.

The tool has high stability.

I rate the tool’s scalability a nine out of ten.

We require technical and pre-sale support.

Positive

The initial setup was easy. I rate the ease of setup a ten out of ten. It is an enterprise-level solution.

Compared to HPE and Dell, the commercial aspect of the product is on the higher side. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

I use the solution for routing. 

The C-series is the most valuable. 

The improvement should be done as per customer requirements. 

I have been using Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers for four years. 

It is a highly stable solution. 

It is a highly scalable solution. Twenty four users are using the solution. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

The initial setup is easy. It's just create a script and then you upload it. The deployment takes two to three hours. 

The solution is moderately priced. 

I would rate the overall solution a nine out of ten. 

Cisco rack servers are very easy to integrate with other products from different vendors.

Generally, the solution performs well, but some customers have complained about delivery time. So, the main weakness is the lead time.

We provide Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers to our customers. However, the lead time for these servers, as well as for the switches, has been very long since COVID. So some people are looking at other products because of that.

The solution is very reliable and performs well. The customers never had any problems with them.

Scalability is okay. The solution offers good scalability.

I've heard some complaints because Cisco didn't have a dedicated company to manage the accounts. They used to be very vigilant in customer service, but once they were acquired, the customer experience has not been so good, especially regarding technical support.

Neutral

The solution is very easy to deploy.

For a typical deployment, with the right information, it should take about 2-3 weeks. However, if you need to customize the servers or deploy them in a complex environment, it could take longer.

The pricing is expensive. Compared to its competitors, Cisco servers are more expensive. The price of Cisco servers can vary depending on the configuration, the number of servers being purchased, the amount of RAM, and the storage capacity.

We are working with Cisco, Fortinet, Palo Alto, and all the popular options. We work with everything Cisco offers, like switches, routers, firewalls, and email security.

I would recommend them as long as they have the budget for it, but exploring other options is also worthwhile.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. In terms of the product itself, I don't think they need to add any features. However, they could improve the delivery charge and technical support price.

This solution is for our customers. 

The clients care about the basic services on the UCS Server. They just want the server to transfer onto it their virtual machine.

They are looking for data configuration and no point of failure. They want multiple network cards for fiber. They usually ask for 10 gigs or 25 gigs fiber force or even ethernet. That's what they ask for most of the time.

The Cisco UCS Servers are very dependable, and they're very reliable. The clients are very happy with the product.

The solution is stable. 

Technical support is excellent.

The product is losing ground to the competition, such as Nutanix.

It's not a scalable product.

The pricing is too high and higher discounts should be available for our country.

We'd like the solution to have integration with HCI software. As per my knowledge, Cisco doesn't have any HCI software.

As a company, we've been dealing with the product for around five years.

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We've had no complaints about stability in over five years. 

The solution does not scale. 

The solution is better suited for SMEs. An enterprise, when they have 20 or 30 servers, prefers something like HCI.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. It is very reliable yet very expensive.

Technical support is very good. It's one of the best support services. 

We've only used Cisco up until this point. 

There is a plan to go with HCI.

Many clients are moving based on Nutanix's reputation, basically. One client went with Nutanix, and they're very happy with it. Therefore, other companies are following suit. They usually read Gartner reports and base their product decisions on finding there. 

The pricing in Yemen should be lower. It's high for the region. 

For Yemen, generally, some manufacturers can't apply the same discounts they give to other countries due to the war and the economic situation. Yet we need more discounts. 

We are partners with Dell and Cisco. 

I'm responsible for presales in general and management.

The most valuable feature of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is server management.

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.

I have been using Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers for approximately 10 years

Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers are stable.

The scalability of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is okay. However, we do not have many options in this category.

We have enterprise-sized customers using this solution.

The support from Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers has been satisfactory. However, not all of the support agents have the same level of knowledge. We can experience some delays in having a response because the issue we are facing has to be escalated to the next level of agent for support.

We did not have any issues with the initial setup of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers. The process takes approximately 30 minutes.

I do the implementation of this solution for our customers.

The price of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is approximately 20 percent more than other solutions.

When comparing this solution to others, I prefer Dell. Dell is more flexible and technical support is more accessible here in Egypt because they have a technical support office here. Additionally, Dell has a wider array of options that we don't have in Cisco.

The intersite options for management make life easier for the operations and management teams because it's a single point of management for the whole server infrastructure.

I rate Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers an eight out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is to help manage our infrastructure within our data center service.

The solution has improved our organization by easily integrating with our VMware and storage solutions.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the expansion and replacement of parts.

The solution can be improved by adjusting the cost.

I have been using the solution for seven years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

The support team is good, responsive, and helpful.

Positive

Before using the solution we used Dell and HP solutions and we switched because of a suggestion from our technology partner.

The initial setup is straightforward and takes a couple of hours. 

The implementation was completed through a vendor team.

The solution requires an annual licensing fee.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

The solution can be implemented by one person in a couple of hours.

We currently have 1000 people using the solution.

I recommend the solution to others.

The solution is reliable and easy to use. 

The capacity is quite small, so I need the CPU performance to be a bit higher. The memory is also limited, and we cannot upgrade more. The solution needs more capacity and more scalability. 

I have been working with this product for three years.

The product is scalable. Currently, we have six people working with it in our company. 

The technical support from Cisco is fair. 

I have used HP and Dell servers before. The products are pretty similar, but we use them for different purposes. 

The initial setup was easy. It was not complex. It took around two hours, including the installation of the operating system. 

We handled the implementation with help from the local vendor. 

The price for Cisco is a bit higher than its competitors. We paid 40k for one server. We paid 50% at the time of the purchase order and 50% after the product was delivered. 

I would rate this solution as a nine out of ten.