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

Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series 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

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
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 Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series is 4.0%, up from 0.3% 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%
Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series4.0%
Other86.2%
Blade Servers
 

Featured Reviews

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…
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

"It is a very practical solution because you have all the servers in a minimal space."
"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."
"Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series has two processors."
"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."
"The solution has good performance."
"Valuable features include the speed at which you can deploy a system, the server profiles, and the ability to move those profiles around at will."
"The most valuable feature, of course, is its size as I can build a huge compute resource on it."
"It is a good solution, with easy management and setup."
"The solution is scalable, offering flexibility and expansion options to meet changing business needs."
"Modularity is a key feature that provides energy saving ."
"The integration with our existing environment, and its ease of use are valuable."
"The product is good and strong."
 

Cons

"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."
"The initial setup of Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series was complex."
"It can have more automation."
"It is much better to use “normal” servers. The initial investment for a blade server is very high and creates dependency."
"It is much better to use “normal” servers. The initial investment for a blade server is very high and creates dependency."
"Customers are always looking for more performance, just trying to get more out of them."
"If you compare it with Lenovo systems, the pricing is too high."
"The management side of this solution could be improved."
"The early stages weren't as smooth as they should have been."
"I can see the BladeSystem is having some hardware failure issues."
"The management is great but there are other competitors that are implementing a better approach."
"It's pretty scalable, but then again, it's pretty old. It's not as scalable as the Cisco Blades that we currently have, but I'm not going to knock it because of that, it's just because it's old it doesn't have all the technology that Cisco has right now."
"There is always room for improvement everywhere with the HPE BladeSystem."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"We have been satisfied with the price. However, there are additional costs for support."
"The licensing is on an annual basis."
"The price for HPE BladeSystem can vary between $100,000 to $1 million or above. The price can be high."
"It is not expensive, really, in this class of server products."
"The product’s price is high compared to one of its competitors."
"The HPE BladeSystem is an expensive solution."
"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."
"BladeSystem is a little bit cheaper."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Blade Servers solutions are best for your needs.
884,976 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
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise40
Large Enterprise104
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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

No data available
HP ProLiant BL Series Servers, HP ProLiant BladeSystem
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sultan Qaboos University Hospital, Tokyo Stock Exchange, RAF St. Mawgan, King Fahad Medical City, St. Bede’s Catholic High School, 
EMIS Health
Find out what your peers are saying about Fujitsu Primergy BX400 Series vs. HPE BladeSystem and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.