HPE BladeSystem vs HPE Synergy comparison

HPE BladeSystem and HPE Synergy are leading competitors in the enterprise server market, each offering unique advantages. Overall, Synergy is favored for its advanced composable infrastructure and flexibility, while BladeSystem is appreciated for its reliability and compatibility with existing infrastructures.

Features: HPE BladeSystem is noted for its reliability and ease of management, featuring durable ProLiant servers, extensive configurability, and high availability. It integrates well with existing infrastructures. HPE Synergy stands out with its composable infrastructure, allowing resources to be flexibly configured and reallocated. This enables greater density and resource pooling for various workloads.

Room for Improvement: Users of BladeSystem mention issues with parts availability, limited lifespan, and challenges with outdated hardware and integration. There are concerns about backward compatibility and scalability. For Synergy, users seek simpler deployment, better connectivity, and improved networking and storage integration. Managing and streamlining firmware updates is also a noted challenge.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: BladeSystem is praised for its manageability and ease of setup but faces integration challenges with new technologies. Synergy, while offering simplicity due to its composable nature, is initially complex for some users during setup. Both products receive positive feedback for customer service, with BladeSystem support described as superb and Synergy’s support regarded as good, though sometimes slow.

Pricing and ROI: Both BladeSystem and Synergy are priced higher than some competitors like Dell. BladeSystem is valued for its long-term ROI and lower operational expenses, justifying its initial investment costs through performance and reliability. Synergy, though typically more costly due to its advanced features, is seen as worthwhile for its composability and consolidation benefits. Higher upfront costs for Synergy are offset by potential reductions in infrastructure complexity and operating expenses over time.