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

Cisco UCS E-Series Servers vs Dell PowerEdge MX- Series comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 8, 2026

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 E-Series Servers
Ranking in Blade Servers
12th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Dell PowerEdge MX- Series
Ranking in Blade Servers
1st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Blade Servers category, the mindshare of Cisco UCS E-Series Servers is 3.7%, up from 3.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Dell PowerEdge MX- Series is 8.3%, down from 14.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Blade Servers Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Dell PowerEdge MX- Series8.3%
Cisco UCS E-Series Servers3.7%
Other88.0%
Blade Servers
 

Featured Reviews

AK
Solution Architect at COPYCAT LIMITED
Automation and integration capabilities streamline IT infrastructure management
The most valuable feature of Cisco UCS E-Series Servers is the Cisco interface. The server management and automation capabilities have been outstanding in automation, greatly benefiting our IT team. Pricing is acceptable, and these servers have had a significant impact on cost savings and operational efficiency. The integration with Cisco routers simplifies the IT infrastructure.
Deepak Bisht - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineer at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees
Modern infrastructure has reduced our rack footprint and simplifies large-scale virtualization
No product is perfect, and there are improvements that can be done on Dell PowerEdge MX- Series. The first improvement is the complex matrix for firmware updates and patching. Managing the cycle for a modular chassis means managing alignment across multiple layers: the chassis management module, compute nodes including I/O, BIOS, and iDRAC, switch network OS such as SmartFabric OS, and the hypervisor driver.Upgrading firmware can feel challenging when an OS10 switch patch is out of sync with an iDRAC version and a VMware ESXi driver release, as it can trigger network instability or failed compliance checks. A simple, single-click, whole-stack update engine that completely guarantees baseline stability across switch OS, server BIOS, and hypervisor drivers without manual dependency checking would be beneficial. The second area for improvement is the high upfront cost and initial setup complexity. The initial capital expenditure for an MX7000 chassis, redundant management nodes, and fabric switching engines is steep compared to buying a few standalone 2U servers or rack servers. Additionally, initial configuration, particularly setting up SmartFabric services and inter-chassis stacking, has a steep learning curve. A lower barrier to entry price for smaller cities and a simplified deployment wizard for IT generalists who do not specialize in enterprise network fabrics would be improvements. The third improvement is the limited native GPU density for modern AI workloads. While composable PCIe fabric exists, running intensive AI training locally inside the chassis is restricted. Sleds designed with specialized cooling, specifically tailored to support high-wattage enterprise GPUs natively with the standard sled footprint, would be beneficial. Power and thermal management per rack is another area that can be improved. A fully populated MX7000 series loaded with high-wattage CPUs, dual switches, and NVMe drives consumes a significant amount of power in a compact 7U space. Racking three or four chassis in a single rack can typically exceed standard power density limits or require specialized rack power distribution units and high-CFM cooling airflow.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product is overall stable."
"What I can advise other prospective customers is that they should not worry about Cisco's support, stability, and performance."
"The Cisco chassis is very easy to configure and any network engineer or expert can configure the solution and easily integrate it with the chassis."
"Cisco has better visibility and manageability for disaster recovery."
"The product's most valuable features are stability, speed, and scalability."
"Cisco UCS E-Series Servers have been reliable, and it took almost five years for any hardware failure, which was only about a $100 repair, so nothing too major."
"Stability-wise, it is a good product that remains stable."
"Overall, the Cisco chassis is pretty good, pretty stable and easier to configure as compared to HP and others."
"The solution is made with high-quality hardware."
"This system is really good as far as the performance, compared to other legacy or older blade models."
"The solution's most valuable features are centralized monitoring and management and the ease of upgrading firmware."
"Overall, Dell PowerEdge MX- Series are solid products."
"The biggest advantage of PowerEdge is that it is cost-effective, and its performance and infrastructure are much better than other competitors like Lenovo and HP, with very good performance even when you are using it at one hundred percent load."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Once we moved to Dell products, it all came together, we could use all three."
"PowerEdge has high functionality, especially for automation on the firmware, which allows us to receive alerts for issues."
 

Cons

"The processing capacity could be improved."
"The biggest pain point for us is the matrix for the firmware upgrades. It is a pain. You look at that thing, you might as well be reading Greek. It would be a whole lot better if they could clean up their documentation on it."
"One thing that could be improved is the cost - it is very high for this Blade chassis as compared to other vendors. Especially in Asia. Asian customers mostly prefer a cost effective, cheaper solution."
"I am always asked to justify why we should purchase such expensive hardware when there are other brand names available with same capacity for a lesser price."
"I think that's probably one of the biggest failure points with Cisco, from their documentation all the way to their products."
"The platform's pricing needs improvement. There could be more collaborative tools included."
"The tool must be made compatible with multi-vendor ecosystems."
"The product should also be available in a standard edition or a standard license since currently there is a need to pay for an extra license, which is very expensive, especially when considering the budgeting part of our company."
"If I could improve Dell PowerEdge MX-Series, I would consider additional features that are more AI compliant, enhanced pricing options, and faster technical support response times."
"More interconnections with third party equipment and limited I/O selection."
"The firmware updates for the product need improvement."
"I did not have any problem with the initial pricing or cost setup with Dell PowerEdge MX- Series, but I had some problems with ongoing maintenance and getting regular updates from Dell."
"There is room for improvement in scalability."
"Dell PowerEdge MX-Series is not a good solution for AI due to the lack of support for the expansion of GPUs; there is a solution, but it is not a useful one."
"Dell PowerEdge M needs to run AMD CPUs on it."
"I suggest adding an additional network card within the blades, specifically for connectivity."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."
"The product is expensive."
"The pricing of the solution is reasonable. From a commercial point of view, the prices are okay."
"It's expensive, they are quite pricey."
"There is a need to pay towards the licensing costs of the solution. The most expensive server from Cisco is Cisco UCS B-Series."
"The pricing of PowerEdge Next is higher than it was before."
"The cost varies significantly depending on the server's configuration and can range from $10,000 to $60,000 for the same server line family."
"I know we get three years basic, and the on-site licensing model for business seems fine. I wouldn't pay for a support plus or anything."
"The product is neither expensive nor cheap. It is manageable for medium enterprises as well."
"Dell PowerEdge M price is comparable to other solutions but cheaper than IBM. However, the IBM solution is a higher grade solution whereas Dell PowerEdge M is a medium-level solution."
"If we would not have gone with the vendor we might have been charged unnecessarily for packages we did not need."
"It was budget friendly."
"The solution's pricing is slightly higher."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Blade Servers solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Wholesaler/Distributor
7%
Outsourcing Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise22
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco UCS E-Series Servers?
The pricing of Cisco UCS E-Series Servers is okay, costing around 30,000 per year. Support is included in this cost.
What needs improvement with Cisco UCS E-Series Servers?
I would like to see improvements in VMware integration with Cisco, especially in terms of documentation and integration tools. Support of NVIDIA integration would also make it better.
What is your primary use case for Cisco UCS E-Series Servers?
I use Cisco UCS E-Series Servers ( /products/cisco-ucs-e-series-servers-reviews ) for managing our IT infrastructure and supporting AI-driven projects. The integration with Cisco routers simplifies...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Dell PowerEdge M?
I was involved in the pricing, licensing, setup, and the cost of Dell PowerEdge MX- Series. I find that experience manageable because I do it with your support; I do not do it by myself.
What needs improvement with Dell PowerEdge M?
I do not know how Dell PowerEdge MX- Series can be improved; I think it is a perfect solution and we have OpenManage that manages all the servers together. I do not think about any features that sh...
What is your primary use case for Dell PowerEdge M?
My main use cases for Dell PowerEdge MX- Series involve implementation, creating profiles for those servers, and implementing the OS on the servers. I do not use Dell PowerEdge MX- Series for runni...
 

Also Known As

UCS E-Series Servers
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Navaho,  MiroNet AG, Columbia Sportswear
Newport City Homes, Neuroblastoma and Medulloblastoma Translational Research Consortium (NMTRC), Georgian College, AgreeYa Solutions, IIHT Cloud Solutions, Arizona State University, AudienceScience, University of the Incarnate Word (UIW), The Translational Genomics Research Institute (TGen), Holy Cross School
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco UCS E-Series Servers vs. Dell PowerEdge MX- Series and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.