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

HPE Synergy vs Supermicro SuperBlade comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on May 25, 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

HPE Synergy
Ranking in Blade Servers
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
90
Ranking in other categories
Composable Infrastructure (1st)
Supermicro SuperBlade
Ranking in Blade Servers
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Blade Servers category, the mindshare of HPE Synergy is 20.6%, down from 21.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Supermicro SuperBlade is 6.2%, down from 7.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Blade Servers
 

Featured Reviews

CarlosArdila - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps grow horizontally or vertically within one box or chassis
The initial setup is very easy. We deployed this in two days, including installation, system setup, firmware upgrades, configuration, and network connection. By the next day, we were already deploying virtual machines. We initially began with the Blade system. As the migration to SAP HANA approached, it seemed prudent to upgrade our hardware. Consequently, we facilitated their transition from the Blade system to Synergy. Subsequently, we collaborated closely with the SAP consultancy company to oversee the migration process, ensuring seamless integration of all workloads and sub-environments. We have four people working on the deployment, including a project manager, two specialists, and one tech support.
Gergely Lakos - PeerSpot reviewer
With many servers in one, these blade servers are easier to manage
The service could be improved by faster servers, more widely available VMs, and more storage in one place. Then, in the event of a blade failure, we could start our VMs on another blade in a couple of minutes. This is why we wanted to buy storage. But now, we want to buy a twin server with 24 VMware discs to create test storage. The next product release should allow more servers to be controlled simultaneously.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Being able to connect my 3PAR arrays to the Synergy platform is the most valuable aspect to me."
"It is helping us sort of bridge a gap that we are having moving off of old legacy systems, like HP-UX systems and trying to move over to x86. So, it is helping fill a hardware gap that a lot of our platforms have needed in the past."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the ease of management and the integration with OneView."
"The product enables the centralization of all administrative tasks."
"We build out a whole stack at one time, so we don't have to worry about it until that stack is full, then that gives us time to get the next one ready."
"It's a bit easier to manage than the C7000s."
"For me, this is the best frame server technology available in the market. We can compare it to Cisco UCS. It is robust and stable, and it is also easy to deploy and scale. Their support is the best."
"It is first in class for composable infrastructure. It has the scalability that meets our future needs and the automation that builds into something that we are really looking forward to using.​"
"I think the IPMI is a really good feature."
"The ability to save resource is a key feature."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
 

Cons

"Changes to the solution are quite complex."
"This solution could be improved by increasing the speed on the conversion adapters. It should be 100 gigs."
"I would really like a way to validate the firmware in my specific environment before trying to deploy it. Those were the issues we had early on with firmware upgrades, particularly around certificates. All in all, having some level of confidence aside from it just having been tested generically would help. Something more specific to my environment would be very helpful."
"Instead of having Synergy vertical, make it horizontal. It is easier to stick in when it is vertical."
"Technical support was time consuming and unsatisfactory. The initial product setup was complex, lasing around three weeks to a month."
"One of the features I want to see, which I will see with OneView 5.0, is to have all the OneView consoles in a single pane of glass. That will make it easy to see everything in one place and not have to log in to multiple consoles."
"The performance could be better. The converged network cards initially didn't work. However, later on in the newer version, they came up with 50 GB network cards to replace the 20 GB ones, and it's perfectly fine now. At times, it could also be more stable."
"There is certainly a feature or two missing."
"The solution does not scale well."
"There is a lack of support for fiber channels currently that needs to be added."
"Supermicro blade servers are not the best. They could improve in scalability but are not really scalable right now."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We do a biannual renewal. I know how much that renewal is, but I don't know how much it breaks down to be just Synergy, since we have our VMware, all of our physical equipment, etc. all rolled up into one renewal, which is a little over $300,000 every two years. However, only a subset of that is the Synergy product."
"We don't have to pay for Synergy because it's part of our plan."
"Nutanix was really hard to implement, and it was very pricey compared to what we get from Synergy."
"We bought everything outright to start with. We don't do much consumption-based stuff."
"There was at least about a 20 percent savings in cost over our purchase based on the purchase price of the compute modules themselves versus what we've had to pay before. It was significantly less."
"The solution has reduced our IT infrastructure costs by 50 percent."
"For me, the scalability is how much money that I need to spend on switches for how many frames, which ultimately means servers. To get the best bandwidth before the most recent product announcement, I have buy new switches every three frames. The competition is shipping a product right now where I only need switches every ten frames."
"In our whole environment, the cost is in the millions. On this particular chassis, the annual cost is 12 blades times approximately $40,000."
"The product is not expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Blade Servers solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
12%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 Synergy?
It is a good product for hypervisors.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for HPE Synergy?
Pricing in the blade server market is very competitive, with HPE offering a competitive price. Competitor products include Dell's MX series and Cisco's UCS X series.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
SuperBlade
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

HudsonAlpha, Virgin Media, EMIS, United
Prace
Find out what your peers are saying about HPE Synergy vs. Supermicro SuperBlade and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.