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

FlexPod XCS vs HPE ConvergedSystem comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 2, 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

FlexPod XCS
Ranking in Converged Infrastructure
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
295
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
HPE ConvergedSystem
Ranking in Converged Infrastructure
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Converged Infrastructure for SAP HANA (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Converged Infrastructure category, the mindshare of FlexPod XCS is 9.4%, down from 9.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HPE ConvergedSystem is 19.5%, up from 16.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Converged Infrastructure
 

Featured Reviews

Chris Haight - PeerSpot reviewer
Integrates everything so you are using fewer tools
The traditional UCS Blades do not take much storage internally. You would be challenged to create an HCI (Hype converged Infrastructure) solution on FlexPod / UCS or any other solution that pools internal storage. Now, with UCS X-Series, you can carve off an HCI solution, software defined pooled solution if you want. This was one area of improvement that I wanted to see and can now realize with the refresh of the Cisco UCS infrastructure. With modern modular infrastructure, RESTful API has been added, there are more integrations, ServiceNow and vCenter along with tighter plug-ins. There is cross-user interface launching, for example with Windows Admin Center. The solutions are using Ansible and Terraform for deploying infrastructure as code. All the improvements that I wanted from the last gen are here or coming. With modern workloads and GPU use on the rise, adding GPUs to modern modular infrastructure will have some pros and cons. Typically, you can add one or two GPU's to a blade with no or little trade off. With the UCS X-Series, if you are doing a GPU farm, then you may have to sacrifice compute blades in the front slots to put in a GPU tray / module. A chassis holds eight compute blades, but if you are adding a ton of GPUs, a single GPU tray or more will reduce your blade count by as many GPU trays you add. This is not just a Cisco UCS X-Series problem. It is an industry problem with modular infrastructure and one that I would like to see get solved! I am looking into one such solution, VMware BITFUSION where you can send CUDA requests over the network to a BITFUSION server with the results sent back to the requestor, early stages here and only scratched the surface thus far. With Cisco UCS X-Series, I would like to see the fabric interconnects built into the chassis instead of being external. With the fabric interconnects, the real footprint of UCS X-Series is 9U, where some of the competing solutions are 7U and have collapsed the network fabric into the chassis. This is another thing that I would like to see from Cisco, though, not really on the NetApp side of the fence, NetApp is solid storage.
Fatai Akinwande - PeerSpot reviewer
Has the ability to easily scale resources and redistribute workloads across multiple hosts
HPE ConvergedSystem could be enhanced by improving the built-in backup solution, as the current one fell short of our needs and led us to opt for third-party tools like Veeam. Additionally, addressing challenges related to remote copy functionality, especially in low-bandwidth conditions, would significantly improve the overall usability and effectiveness of HPE solutions in our setup.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the ability to integrate different products into one validated design. That allows customers to understand and get the value out of the hardware, as it was designed."
"Once it is in place, we do not touch it, so it is more stable than other solutions."
"The solution has granular scalability."
"FlexPod's native integration with hyperscalers is one of the reasons we chose to look at it and NetApp. That is one of the key components of our infrastructure. That native integration is very important."
"For FlexPod, it is always trustworthy. I had previously never seen flex machines from other brands or associated with other products. FlexPod is a large investment and they are good enough to support it."
"Availability is the most valuable part of this solution. We have not had any trouble since we installed it."
"Our customers get their applications to market more quickly, and it has taken the risk out of their business, because there is less for them to try to figure out."
"The solution makes our staff more efficient, enabling them to spend time on tasks that drive our business forward. The environment is more homogeneous, so there are not as many technologies to study and learn. People can focus on improving their knowledge in existing technologies."
"The storage, BladeSystems, Virtual Connect, and simplicity with hyper-converged solutions are the most valuable features of this solution."
"This is a scalable solution. Our customers begin with an initial configuration and later add more servers, memory and other options to meet the demands of increased processing."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to restore lost machines. Essentially its high availability capabilities are extremely valuable to us."
"The flexibility is the most advantageous aspect of the solution. Our system has a very big environment. Due to this, the replication and backup operation is not an easy task. We prefer HPE SimpliVity modules in our environment, even when we have some different cases in operations."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the flexibility and the availability of the machines."
"The tool's most valuable features are stability and scalability."
"Consolidation and duplications features."
"We use the solution for DDI."
 

Cons

"Sometimes, when the newer versions of any of the partners’ firmware or software come out, there's still sometimes a lag of the partners to support all of those new components."
"The GPU based VDA solutions could use improvement."
"On the NetApp side, there are definitely things to improve in terms of software updates."
"We would like more security features."
"Not a perfect ten because it could use better integration on the network side between UCS and the switching layer. The fact that LACP is not supported on UCS blades isn't so great. It would be nice if it was."
"I would also like to feel more support. NetApp has been pretty good, for the most part, but Cisco has more work to do. I've had very good experience with NetApp. Instead of having to call three different areas and saying, "I'm a FlexPod customer." It would be nice if it could be just one that gets routed. I know it would require three large companies to work together, but that's what would make this product a ten. They could definitely use with making it more user-friendly."
"The last two calls that I have made to NetApp support have been handled too casually. People are too lax, not quite as professional as I would have liked."
"We would like one-click upgrades."
"Features that should be addressed concern the HPE functionality and the interaction with VMware."
"HPE ConvergedSystem needs to improve its price."
"This is an expensive solution."
"Perhaps they can work on providing faster allocation of memory or storage."
"There is some scope for improvement in support. The response time could be better."
"I would like to see monitoring solutions included, as well as brand support."
"The solution needs to add NFS features."
"The interface is not fully integrated with the ESXi, which is something that could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is always tough. We need to get to a point where the customer's happy. Then, as partners, we are also happy."
"The cost is a little high."
"We pay approximately $1,400 USD in total for between five-thousand and ten-thousand ports."
"We have absolutely seen ROI. We have saved between two to four million dollars on travel alone over the past 24 months."
"Sometimes you may end up spending a little more to get it in the first place, but you gain it back in terms of infrastructure upgrade costs and troubleshooting costs. The solution also lasts a surprisingly long time."
"The pricing and licensing are quite expensive. However, compared to other solutions, it is okay."
"It's expensive, but when you pay for enterprise support and enterprise products, you have to pay the big bucks."
"It has saved us hundreds of man-hours by using this converged infrastructure."
"There are some extra costs in addition to the licensing costs for the yearly maintenance from professional third-party services."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly."
"The pricing is competitive. Not a major problem. We have a subscription model."
"This is an expensive solution."
"The pricing is sensitive."
"I rate the product price an eight and a half on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"My company has a five year contract for HPE ConvergedSystem. The contracts depend on companies and sometimes it can be three years. The solution is worth its price."
"This is an expensive system and not every customer has the kind of budget to support it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Converged Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user244362 - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 30, 2015
Nutanix vs. VMware EVO:RAIL vs. FlexPod
Originally posted at www.storagegaga.com/dont-get-too-drunk-on-hyper-converged/ I hate the fact that I am bursting the big bubble brewing about Hyper Convergence (HC). I urge all to look past the hot air and hype frenzy that are going on, because in the end, the HC platforms have to be aligned…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
21%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Educational Organization
10%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about FlexPod?
The system is designed for easy scaling. Because we define everything clearly. So when we plug the system in, we apply the profile, and it scales easily.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for FlexPod?
The pricing is not cheaper, but stability is more important for us now. We focus on business gains, not static numbers. Following XCS rules ensures a stable environment, which is crucial. For me, C...
What needs improvement with FlexPod?
FlexPod should focus more on automation. Integrating an automation tool with FlexPod would enable customers to leverage automation capabilities. More automation would be helpful. Currently, we cont...
What do you like most about HPE ConvergedSystem?
The most valuable features of the solution are the flexibility and the availability of the machines.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for HPE ConvergedSystem?
I rate the product price an eight and a half on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.
What needs improvement with HPE ConvergedSystem?
Pricing is an area of concern in the solution where improvements are required.
 

Also Known As

No data available
HPE ConvergedSystem 700, HPE ConvergedSystem for SAP HANA, CS500, HPE ConvergedSystem 900, HPE ConvergedSystem 500, HPE ConvergedSystem 300
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

University of Sao Paulo, WD-40, The Commonwell Mutual Insurance Group
FAW-Volkswagen, NICS, NBrIX, Pinpoint, HPE Technology Services, SWS, Ko Sistem, HPE
Find out what your peers are saying about FlexPod XCS vs. HPE ConvergedSystem and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.