Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco UCS E-Series Servers vs HPE BladeSystem 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 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
2nd
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 March 2026, in the Blade Servers category, the mindshare of Cisco UCS E-Series Servers is 3.7%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HPE BladeSystem is 9.8%, down from 13.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Blade Servers Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
HPE BladeSystem9.8%
Cisco UCS E-Series Servers3.7%
Other86.5%
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.
Kapil Pandey - PeerSpot reviewer
Technology Management Consultant at National Institute for Smart Government - NISG
Reliability and reasonable pricing enhance data center management
I researched on peerspot.com about IT solutions, specifically about HPE BladeSystem and HPE Synergy, because we are already using HP servers in our state data center. In HP Cloud System, we are using a converged infrastructure to connect LAN and SAN connectivity across the network. Regarding Virtual Connect technology, there is a noticeable impact on network management. For day-to-day operations, we use various applications such as Zoom and Microsoft Teams to connect virtually. Using HPE BladeSystem Virtual Connect technology in HP Cloud System, we achieve efficient network management with well-defined LAN and SAN connectivity. We already have a defined modular architecture in place designed by the HP team for our data center. My company name is National Institute for Smart Government, also called NISG, under the National e-Governance Division. My title is Technology Management Consultant. I would rate HPE BladeSystem as an eight out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Cisco has better visibility and manageability for disaster recovery."
"Stability-wise, it is a good product that remains stable."
"The product's most valuable features are stability, speed, and scalability."
"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."
"The product is overall stable."
"They are really easy to maintain. I've added RAM to them. I've done a lot of other things with the virtualization."
"The most valuable features are that they are efficient and easy to setup."
"The server management and automation capabilities have been outstanding in automation, greatly benefiting our IT team."
"The scalability has been good."
"HPE BladeSystem is very easy to use."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"No issues with scalability. ​We can scale by adding another enclosure."
"The solution has high performance."
"The most valuable feature of the HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management."
"They have served different needs for us from virtualized web servers to dedicated databases and application servers."
"It provides a secure access to the console and reliable administration."
 

Cons

"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."
"It is not a solution that is cloud ready."
"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."
"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."
"The tool must be made compatible with multi-vendor ecosystems."
"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."
"The processing capacity could be improved."
"The platform's pricing needs improvement. There could be more collaborative tools included."
"Creating an integrated solution could make HPE BladeSystem more appealing."
"HPE BladeSystem could improve the communication between the server and the storage."
"The interface in terms of management could be much more intuitive."
"The support you get is dependant on the region. Some regions are better than others."
"BladeSystem is an old-fashioned server and not very well developed for new features and new areas of data centers, which is not very good for enterprise companies."
"The response time in terms of getting technical support assistance could be improved."
"The management side of this solution could be improved."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is expensive."
"It's expensive, they are quite pricey."
"The pricing of the solution is reasonable. From a commercial point of view, the prices are okay."
"The solution is expensive."
"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 licensing is on an annual basis."
"The pricing is competitive."
"I would recommend this solution for large enterprises. Medium-sized companies would find it difficult to afford the HPE BladeSystem's overall capital expenses."
"It is expensive. There are no additional costs. We are able to get good discounts anyway from HPE, but if the price can come down, we'll be happy."
"Its pricing was good. We selected this solution because it was within our budget. We paid just once when we bought it. We never bought any license."
"When you purchase HPE BladeSystem you have to pay for the support service. The first three years are covered under the warranty, and for any further support, you have to pay annually. When comparing the cost of HPE BladeSystem to other vendors, the fees are less expensive."
"The product’s price is high compared to one of its competitors."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Blade Servers solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
10%
Marketing Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
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 do you like most about HPE BladeSystem?
The solution is scalable, offering flexibility and expansion options to meet changing business needs.
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 ...
 

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: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.