No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco UCS B-Series vs Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 3, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco UCS B-Series
Ranking in Blade Servers
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
74
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series
Ranking in Blade Servers
13th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Blade Servers category, the mindshare of Cisco UCS B-Series is 7.3%, down from 8.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series is 4.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Blade Servers Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco UCS B-Series7.3%
Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series4.7%
Other88.0%
Blade Servers
 

Featured Reviews

MB
Head of IT Operations at NCC BANK LIMITED
Efficient server management reduces costs and supports seamless operations
Cisco UCS B-Series has reliably sustained smooth operations without the need for significant maintenance. Its administration capabilities provide easy access to performance reports, logs, and utilization data, which are essential for effective server management. Additionally, the integration capabilities are seamless, and the power consumption and heat generation are low, resulting in reduced cooling costs and increased financial benefits.
Cyrille Darmon - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Technology Officer for E&V Group at NISKO TECH
A highly stable solution with technical support that is not only good but also always available to help the product's users
My company's IT activities are carried out with the help of the solution. My company's customers use the solution in their telecom department or for telecommunication purposes The most valuable feature of the solution is its stability. The initial setup of Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series should be…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"What we really like about the product is the scalability of the entire server system, as the platform's architecture ensures that we can easily grow our systems as the need arises."
"Remote access to the server is very useful."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to replace a server with another one, simply by applying the profile."
"The UCS B-Series is easy to scale; we have approximately 1,000 people using this solution, and it is used on a daily basis."
"The servers' resilience was particularly impactful."
"It is a very robust and reliable solution."
"I have a client who is currently managing 1500 servers with two people for a mission-critical retail operation."
"The GUI makes is simple to use and deploy."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its stability."
"It is a very practical solution because you have all the servers in a minimal space."
"Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series has two processors."
"We installed Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series for a high PC solution, and for this reason, some Microsoft licenses and other special licenses were embedded or bundled to the Fujitsu solution."
 

Cons

"The management interface needs a lot of improvement. As it is right now, it's a pain to use. It's not user-friendly."
"Cisco TAC has been phenomenal in most cases, but we have had a couple of minor instances where the issue took a bit longer than it should have to be resolved."
"The solution is difficult to set up."
"GUI had some trouble before with Java updates, but that is fixed now."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved and made cheaper."
"Over time the solution became more unstable."
"Its scalability could be better."
"Cisco is not going for perpetual licensing."
"It is much better to use “normal” servers. The initial investment for a blade server is very high and creates dependency."
"It can have more automation."
"The initial setup of Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series was complex."
"It can have more automation. In addition, Fujitsu should have a broader portfolio, not specifically in terms of the service solutions, but more in terms of the big picture. A broader portfolio would be nice for providing different solutions for the customers."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Cisco UCS B-Series is an expensive solution."
"It is highly-priced."
"The product cost is high."
"The cost of the Cisco UCS B-Series is comparable to HP solutions but higher than Dell solutions."
"The cost of the blade servers is okay, but the cost of Fabric Interconnects ends up increasing the overall costs. For example, suppose it costs 3,500 USD per blade server. When you include the Fabric Interconnects, you could pay up to 30,000 USD. Therefore, compared to the cost of servers from Lenovo, Huawei, Dell, or HP, the cost of Cisco servers can be high. However, Cisco gives good discounts (about 90% to 94%) to partners and to customers who are already using Cisco servers. New Cisco customers do not get the level of discount that an existing customer does. Because you can get discounts with Cisco, I would give pricing a rating of four out of five."
"Pricing with Cisco is very high."
"Compared to the more in-demand hyper-converged environments such as Nutanix or DVX rail, Cisco UCS B-Series is even more costly due to the expensive fabric interconnects."
"Considering our market, I rate the pricing of Cisco UCS B-Series as a six."
"No license is required to operate the product."
"There are special licenses that are connected to the usage. We installed Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series for a high PC solution, and for this reason, some Microsoft licenses and other special licenses were embedded or bundled to the Fujitsu solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Blade Servers solutions are best for your needs.
902,270 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Marketing Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise41
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco UCS B-Series?
Comparing Cisco UCS B-Series with traditional servers, while its initial cost may be slightly higher, it is not as expensive as Oracle Exadata, making it a worthwhile investment. It pays off in the...
What needs improvement with Cisco UCS B-Series?
There is a need for Cisco UCS B-Series to evolve and scale vertically, particularly with the increasing data demands and the integration of AI, ensuring the solution remains certified and capable u...
What is your primary use case for Cisco UCS B-Series?
The Cisco UCS B-Series servers are used to run backend databases ranging from small, medium, to large, running different versions of RDBMS such as Oracle, SQL, MySQL. It also includes cloud databas...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

UCS B-Series, Unified Computing System B-Series
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aegean Motorway, Anilana Hotels and Resorts, Anonymous Banking Group, Artoni Transporti, Bellevue, BH Telecom, Bowling Green State University, Children's Hospital Colorado, City of Biel, Dimension Data, Dualtec Cloud Builders, Hertz, Houston Methodist, Kuwait Petroleum Italia, Lufthansa Systems GmbH & Co.KG, Outscale, Sony Corporation, Talbots
Sultan Qaboos University Hospital, Tokyo Stock Exchange, RAF St. Mawgan, King Fahad Medical City, St. Bede’s Catholic High School, 
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco UCS B-Series vs. Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,270 professionals have used our research since 2012.