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

Cisco UCS E-Series Servers vs HPE BladeSystem comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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
10th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
HPE BladeSystem
Ranking in Blade Servers
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
140
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Blade Servers category, the mindshare of Cisco UCS E-Series Servers is 3.7%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HPE BladeSystem is 8.1%, down from 13.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Blade Servers Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
HPE BladeSystem8.1%
Cisco UCS E-Series Servers3.7%
Other88.2%
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.
TA
CTO at Miraj
Centralized modular platform has improved data center management and supports mission-critical workloads
The main area for improvement I see is the training process. When you use anything, how easily it is to manage is very important in hyper-converged solutions. If you compare it with VMware, it is very familiar. HPE Converged, however, is very large to understand for a new person. I am talking about training and management perspective, and user management. A system integrator and any system engineer who will operate and manage the system should find it easy to understand any configuration part and understanding part, which is currently a little bit tough. In Virtual Connect, we need some improvement. If we are going to move to hybrid, we need to easily move VM transactions from on-premises to cloud. We require a good, more easy process for day-to-day activities. Performance-wise, HPE BladeSystem is good regarding its ability to support mission-critical applications. However, reliability is all dependent on the core and memories, which will centrally control the entire blade and hyper-converged. We require more reliable things because if something goes down in the controller and center control, it is very tough to manage. We require a centralized image that will be replicated to any other device immediately, and all configurations and everything will come as soon as possible.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"They are really easy to maintain. I've added RAM to them. I've done a lot of other things with the virtualization."
"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."
"The server management and automation capabilities have been outstanding in automation, greatly benefiting our IT team."
"The most valuable features are that they are efficient and easy to setup."
"The product's most valuable features are stability, speed, and scalability."
"Overall, the Cisco chassis is pretty good, pretty stable and easier to configure as compared to HP and others."
"Cisco has better visibility and manageability for disaster recovery."
"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."
"Remote management features are valuable."
"The technical support is helpful."
"If you're looking for a solution that has near 100% uptime, these blades provide that."
"We were pleased with the stability of the system as there were no downtimes for the last ten years due to hardware failures."
"We went from 60 physical servers to 10 blades."
"At the time, when we migrated to BladeSystem, we reduced the amount of energy, amount of space, and we got more capacity."
"The most valuable features are its stability, reliability, ease of management, and high performance."
"Single point of management, redundant management components, reliability, easiness of setup and installation."
 

Cons

"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."
"It is not a solution that is cloud ready."
"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 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."
"I think that's probably one of the biggest failure points with Cisco, from their documentation all the way to their products."
"The processing capacity could be improved."
"The tool must be made compatible with multi-vendor ecosystems."
"The platform's pricing needs improvement. There could be more collaborative tools included."
"​Storage capacity could be enhanced."
"However, the installation probably could have gone even quicker except that we realized we didn't have enough RAM with just 512Mb."
"One of the issues we have is firmware on virtual connects; there's a little bit of overlap on the timing that, if you're not careful, can cause a short outage for the BladeSystem."
"I would like OneView to go over the current limit of 40 instances."
"Improving HPE BladeSystem could involve enhancing the customization features which are currently less robust than other tools in the market that offer drag and drop modules."
"We have not needed to contact support because we have not had an issue. However, the partner support we had could improve. There are some disadvantages compared to Dell. The questions that are asked from the support are too lengthy, this causes a delay in support."
"I guess with its ease of use, as far as the configuration of the virtual switches, and things like that all need work."
"Some bugs, which were solved by a firmware update."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is expensive."
"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 solution is expensive."
"The pricing of the solution is reasonable. From a commercial point of view, the prices are okay."
"I don't have access to your financial information or the specific details of this solution's pricing. There are no additional fees. It is the hardware and the support."
"The price of HPE BladeSystem could improve. They need to reduce the price to be able to compete better with other vendors, such as Dell."
"The prices for the HPE Virtual Connect Modules are expensive compared to other I/O Modules available."
"Regarding the cost, HPE BladeSystem is not cheap. The solution and its support are costly, and there are challenges with renewal and pricing, especially in Nigeria, due to the dollar rate and FX issues. However, it is reliable. I don't have specific figures for licensing costs, as the procurement and finance departments handle them."
"The price of HPE BladeSystem is less expensive than some other solutions, such as Dell. The cost of replacement equipment is expensive."
"The HPE BladeSystem is an expensive solution."
"It is not expensive, really, in this class of server products."
"The product’s price is high compared to one of its competitors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Blade Servers solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
17%
Computer Software Company
9%
Wholesaler/Distributor
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Construction Company
14%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise40
Large Enterprise104
 

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...
How would you choose between HPE's Bladesystem and Synergy?
For me, choosing between HPE’s Bladesystem and Synergy came down to which solution was more powerful, reliable, and stable. It turns out Bladesystem was the winner. Bladesystem is excellent because...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for HPE BladeSystem?
With around 19 years of exposure in working with various servers, including HPE, I encounter challenges in identifying reasonable prices during the setup cost and licensing process, especially for ...
What needs improvement with HPE BladeSystem?
The main area for improvement I see is the training process. When you use anything, how easily it is to manage is very important in hyper-converged solutions. If you compare it with VMware, it is v...
 

Also Known As

UCS E-Series Servers
HP ProLiant BL Series Servers, HP ProLiant BladeSystem
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Navaho,  MiroNet AG, Columbia Sportswear
EMIS Health
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco UCS E-Series Servers vs. HPE BladeSystem and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.