Dell PowerEdge MX- Series Reviews

We are using PowerEdge primarily in our infrastructure. We have an on-premises private cloud and a virtualization layer. We use PowerEdge for automation on the firmware, which provides alerting capabilities whenever there is an issue.

PowerEdge has high functionality, especially for automation on the firmware, which allows us to receive alerts for issues. 

The service and support from Dell have been excellent, typically providing resolution within four hours. Security features were initially a significant attraction, as Dell offered a lot of in-built security. The hardware is stable, which is essential due to the low outage rates.

The caching is a bit weak, which can make the hardware non-responsive, especially on hypervisor layers like ESXi or Hyper-V. Caching is vital for virtualization platforms, which is an area where PowerEdge is a little weaker.

We have been using it for more than five years.

The hardware is very stable. Outages are very rare with Dell products.

Scaling in is good, however, scaling out is where we faced some issues. PowerEdge servers are slightly challenging to scale out.

The support is good. That said, the account management needs to be strengthened.

I have used Lenovo, Cisco, IBM, and Dell previously. I initially chose Dell for their excellent service and support, many in-built security features, and stable hardware.

The initial setup is very simple and straightforward.

It's priced medium, however, recently the global pricing has increased by twelve percent. It would be beneficial for us if the pricing could be reduced by about eight percent.

We are currently using Dell, however, we need to have more discussions with Lenovo for more insights beyond what online searches offer.

Based on my experience, PowerEdge is suitable for all sizes of companies, especially beneficial for BFSI and enterprise-class companies. 

I rate PowerEdge ten out of ten.

We primarily use Dell PowerEdge M for server purposes in solar power plants. The server is utilized as a simple data logger and for SCADA. Our use cases are primarily focused on solar power service for the solar power plant, which involves simple data logging and does not require heavy or complex calculations.

Our company operates in the energy sector and the Dell PowerEdge M serves our needs effectively. The equipment allows us to support SCADA and servers required by our customers. We do not delve much into the intricate configuration and parts specification. We ensure the equipment meets the operational requirements set by our clients.

The server is more common for the mass market and although it is nothing special, what stands out is the good after-sales service provided.

We work primarily with power plants such as thermal, solar, and wind power plants. There is no specific feedback on improvements directly from our usage. If areas need improvement, we would address them with our integrator. 

I have been dealing with Dell PowerEdge for five years.

I cannot say specifically about the stability as it is not my area of concern.

I don't know about the scalability.

I rate their customer service at nine out of ten since our requests have been attended to in a timely manner.

Positive

My customers prefer Dell, and for us, Dell has provided all the support we need. I cannot say about switching from another solution as Dell remains our preferred choice.

We have not specifically gotten into the initial setup details. It might be straightforward for the end-users, however, I do not directly deal with it.

We contact the integrator to handle the parts related to the implementation and maintenance.

I do not have any specific return on investment information regarding Dell's impact on our company.

The pricing is okay for us. For us, the confidence in Dell's equipment is higher than HP. HP is cheaper, however, our preference for Dell comes from its reliability and support.

I recommend Dell PowerEdge M. Over the past five to six years that I have worked with PowerEdge, I have had no complaints from my customers.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I use the solution in my company for virtualization.

The solution's most valuable feature is its interface. The tool allows you to choose any interface you want. For example, you can choose a 10, 25, or 100 GB fiber channel.

It is a pretty dynamic product and is better than everyone else's servers. HP has lost its way, and we are not going to use Lenovo in our company.

I believe that the tool’s support team is an area with certain concerns where improvements can be made.

I have been using Dell PowerEdge M for fifteen years. My company has a partnership with Dell.

My impression of the scalability of the product is good. You can put a lot of memory in the tool now, and you have a good choice in processors, so you can go wherever you want or do whatever you want with your money. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

My experience with the support team has been straightforward. Your first call with the support team is a lucky draw. If the problem is massive enough, the tool quickly offers tier-three support. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

The product's initial setup phase was always straightforward.

On a scale of one to ten, if ten was the most straightforward, I rate the setup phase a nine.

Only one person can deploy the solution. We go online with SAN and move the virtualization to it. People involved in the deployment process varies but the person that takes care of the servers or SAN Storage would do it when it isn't delegated to one person.

The solution can be deployed in a couple of hours.

I have seen that most people run the tool for seven to ten years. I don't think there's any problem with the return on investment.

I know we get three years basic, and the on-site licensing model for business seems fine. I wouldn't pay for a support plus or anything.

My company use the tool. We are pretty much in Dell PowerEdge's camp, so we aren't looking into the alternatives. We looked at HP, and it was horrible.

My company has experience with other products in the market, and we started to use Dell after HP wore us out. HP is horrible. We decided to try Dell and haven't looked back since then. There are differences between HP and Dell in areas such as support. The on-site support from HP is bad as they can't diagnose the problems right, and then they have to go into one piece at a time. The on-site support ends up causing death for you one day. My company is not a fan of HP.

The tool handles workload variations in our company's environment since we use a VMware stack, causing everything to be distributed across servers.

I would recommend the product to others because it is cheaper than Cisco and better than HP.

My company is not currently deploying AI in the product, but AI reviews many things related to Dell and can tell you what your trends are, which is helpful.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.

Running ESXi.

One good option is that they now have a template or profile creation. This wasn't possible in previous models like the PowerEdge M1000e or the 1955 and 1855 series. The 7000 series introduced this time-saving approach. You configure a template, and when you add a new server, you can deploy it from that template with consistent configurations.

Also, configuring the iDRAC (integrated Dell Remote Access Controller) is easy. You only need to apply settings in a few places, and they are applied across all blades.

For the 7000 series, it has its own management console. For rack servers, you can use OpenManage software.

With OpenManage, you can monitor the servers, perform health checks, and configure email notifications. However, we mainly use it for hardware alerts, as our primary focus is on ESXi.

One area for improvement is VLAN configuration. With Cisco UCS, you apply settings in one place, and they are applied across all the levels. With PowerEdge M, you need to apply them in multiple places, like on the SmartFabric and the M series blades themselves. It would be more convenient if we could apply VLAN configurations in one or two places, like in UCS.

Also, in UCS, you can upload the configuration from the support bundle to the infrastructure. Dell has made improvements in this area for PowerEdge M, as they didn't have this option previously.

One more thing I would like to see is about training. Previously, there were some foundational-level courses on Dell's learning site. If those kinds of training were provided again, that would be helpful.

For ESXi, I did all the foundation courses available on VMware's website. Dell might offer courses on mobility, but I am not sure about recent offerings. In the past, there were foundational courses available, but I don't know if that has changed since Broadcom acquired VMware. However, advanced and professional courses were available from VMware, which is what most companies use if they are looking for those levels. But initial-level courses were something we expected from Dell.

My current company procured this product around two years ago, and before that, I used Dell modular servers as well.

We have PowerEdge servers, and we also have the 7000 series. We used blade servers, specifically the M series. We use PowerEdge R and C series, mostly rack servers.

On the PowerEdge model, specifically the 7000 JST, I have been working on it for the last two years. So far, it's stable. I haven't seen many problems with that product. It's a stable product.

The product is reliable. Uptime is also good, especially when using the server for virtualization platforms. In case one node goes down, the uptime isn't affected because services continue running within the cluster on other nodes. The uptime report from the monitoring tools is good.

Scalability is good. They have improved it, and I'm fine with it. Maybe I don't have high requirements for these aspects.

But overall, it is good. No concerns.

It's okay. The support is adequate. My support experience is okay. I have raised a few tickets and received support. Since I have only been working with it for two years, my experience is limited. 

It is easy. Major time is spent on planning and preparation of the site because we need to work with the network team. Sometimes, it took time, but otherwise, the installation is easy.

Every company has a different kind of process. So, depending on the process, availability of resources, and the network team's support, deployment might take some time. If everything is in place, installation can be done within one to three days.

Deployment resources depend on the deployment size. For example, the number of engineers needed varies depending on whether you are installing two JCPs, three JCPs, or ten to twelve blades.

There is a different team that manages it. Dell servers are still there in the environment.

The M series is similar to Cisco UCS (Unified Computing System). I used it in the past. In my previous organizations, we worked with UCS, but they migrated from UCS to the 7000 series, the blade series. 

Maybe because UCS was more cost-effective and less resource-effective. That's why they moved to that. But in the current environment, we don't have UCS.

For Dell, I rate it a nine out of ten because they have created a solution similar to UCS. They are competing well but still have some improvements to make compared to UCS.

Our facility relies heavily on PowerEdge, spanning multiple generations. It is the foundation of our entire infrastructure, supporting a wide array of workloads, ranging from administrative tasks to private cloud and scientific computing. PowerEdge is a versatile and reliable platform that we can depend on.

PowerEdge has been a foundational part of our IT infrastructure, and its Fresh Air configuration saved us from disasters on multiple occasions. The solution's ability to survive extreme conditions has been invaluable, and its reliability has been astounding. We currently run three generations of PowerEdge in our data centers.

The solution offers remarkable flexibility, reliability, and extensive software support. PowerEdge is capable of running Microsoft private cloud, VMware private cloud, OpenStack, Linux distributions, and scientific workloads. The infrastructure is truly remarkable.

We can typically expect a 20 percent improvement in performance from Intel processors with each new generation, depending on the workload.

Utilizing the OpenManage capabilities of the platform is essential for us since we have a limited number of personnel to manage the PowerEdge that we possess. Thus, OpenManage's console productivity is invaluable for our IT staff.

The PowerEdge servers have proven to be invaluable in preventing up to 90 percent of unplanned production downtime. When other servers were failing due to extreme heat, PowerEdge was able to withstand the conditions and keep running. This made the solution an invaluable part of our operations.

The introduction of PowerEdge servers drastically increased the flexibility of our operations. We are leveraging the solution's capabilities for a wide range of applications and it is certainly the most versatile platform available to us. We deployed a variety of server models in different sizes, ranging from 1U to 2U and beyond, providing us with the flexibility to handle almost any task.

We are testing the latest PowerEdge from Dell for scientific workloads such as machine learning, deep learning, data analysis, and engineering simulation. We see excellent performance improvement and power consumption control. This is part of our Green Data Center project, where we take into account the “green” capabilities of the hardware we buy.

We are beginning to employ cyber-resilient architecture features. It is no longer just the platform security of the past that we take into consideration when making a new acquisition, but now we are also bearing in mind the security features on the server side due to the ever-evolving environment.

We found that the power consumption inside the BIOS of the latest PowerEdge has been significantly improved. The power control capabilities are now much more precise and the iDRAC tool that allows external programs to control the system's power consumption is also much more detailed than its predecessor.

We have been utilizing OpenManage for many years as beta testers, and our experience with OpenManage has been overwhelmingly positive. Dell OpenManage console is incredibly user-friendly and has made our lives significantly easier.

I would like to have additional HPC and AI capabilities on general Dell PowerEdge servers. To optimize the PowerEdge for HPC and AI, modified designs may be necessary.

I have been using Dell PowerEdge .Next for two months.

The stability and power consumption of Dell PowerEdge .Next are incredibly impressive. We have been running a single unit 24 hours a day for a month, primarily to test its stability and understand the power consumption control capabilities, and it exceeded expectations. Compared to the previous PowerEdge models, the stability and power management of .Next are remarkable.

There are no issues with the scalability. Up to now, I haven't been able to identify any drawbacks of the platform I'm using.

Dell's technical support is perfect and one of the reasons we buy their solutions.

Positive

We see a return on investment. The performance of the platform, which we tested on virtualization platforms such as VMware, is very impressive. PCIe 5 has made great improvements in communication and storage. Depending on what we can afford, Intel Scalable Architecture CPUs are more powerful than ever before.

The pricing of Dell PowerEdge .Next has changed drastically due to the introduction of the latest technologies such as PCIe 5, DDR5, and the next generation of CPUs. This caused the prices of CPUs, DRAM, and PCIe cards to skyrocket. Consequently, it is difficult to compare the new pricing to what it was two years ago since the market has evolved significantly. The pricing of PowerEdge .Next is higher than it was before.

Our university is similar to a hardware supermarket, offering almost all brands of hardware, including Lenovo and HP. Although I have not had the opportunity to experience the newest HPE ProLiant 11 machines, I can say that PowerEdge is more reliable, more customizable, and has better management compared to other brands. The iDRAC capabilities, with its easy-to-use remote management, integrate seamlessly with OpenManage. When we purchase a PowerEdge server, we don't need to worry about hidden or additional costs for the management. As for the future, this remains to be seen.

I give Dell PowerEdge .Next a ten out of ten.

We have been testing the latest generation of Dell PowerEdge systems in our data center for the past couple of months, in addition to the generations already in production.

Since 2016, our data center experience has been excellent, with very few hardware issues, including machines that still run from that year.

In our PowerEdge servers, we predominantly use Intel Xeon scalable processors of various generations, with AMD processors making up the remaining 10 percent.

We see a lot of improvement over the generations of PowerEdge. I must admit that while there is plenty of competition, the difference is remarkable. Enhancing PowerEdge is no easy task, yet Dell Technologies took great strides to incorporate customer feedback. The platform grew in flexibility, such as the range of disks available, the evolving iDRAC features to meet customer needs, and so much more.

We host a substantial infrastructure at the University. While we utilize public cloud services such as Microsoft 365 and Google Meets, we do not use them for computing, engineering simulations, or any internal services. All of our services are kept in-house.

The PowerEdge .Next platform is more than just its CPU, it encompasses all the solution's features, from the iDRAC to the next-generation RAID controller, which is 20 to 30 percent faster than the previous generation. Furthermore, Dell PowerEdge .Next's new architecture helps to drive the entire platform, making its performance even more impressive.

There is no significant difference between HPE and Dell Technologies in terms of their use cases. Customers can choose solutions from HPE and Dell that are suitable for their environment. There is not a big difference in use cases for these brands.

Dell offers reliable solutions. When a customer deploys Dell in their environment, they don't usually experience major support requirements or part failures within two to three years, so they don't need much support.

The iDRAC feature is most useful for server management in Dell, comparable to HP iLO. Both Dell and HPE are continuously enhancing their feature sets in new generations. Dell is a reliable solution, and if a customer sets it up in their environment, they will find it dependable without significant support needs.

I do not know if I can comment about the tool itself since I do not have much experience with Dell. I work mostly with HP and only sometimes with Dell. I cannot say where improvement is needed. Dell support should be faster. Dell's technical support sometimes takes time, and there's a support gap issue. HP support is better than Dell's technical support.

I have been working with Dell Technologies for two years.

The stability of Dell PowerEdge is rated at eight. It offers easy setup and is generally considered stable.

Dell's technical support could be improved. HP support is seemingly more reliable and always available for customers.

Neutral

There is more trust in HP solutions as HP's market is bigger in Pakistan compared to that of Dell. HP is perceived as more reliable.

The initial setup is easy. I would rate it 7.5 out of ten.

Customers get a good return on their value of money with Dell PowerEdge. Dell is a reliable solution that does not usually require major support or experience part failures within two to three years.

The cost of Dell is reasonable. Dell is not expensive compared to HP. It is a little cheaper, but customers still prefer HP.

Dell PowerEdge and HP are broadly equivalent in performance. I would recommend choosing Dell PowerEdge if there are cost savings or budget issues, as it is a little cheaper than HP solutions. I rate Dell PowerEdge eight out of ten.

Our primary use cases are mostly for compute and consolidation. If our customer needs to consolidate their existing infrastructure, they are using many applications, software, and databases, and they need a significant number of virtual machines. 

For instance, they might need fifty virtual machines, and they try to consolidate all of this on one chassis, great chassis, and maybe four or five blades to reach good compute and memory performance. This setup allows them to start and explore fifty or sixty machines on the same platform.

We are able to consolidate the infrastructure, which allows us to deploy a large number of virtual machines on a single chassis to enhance performance.

The most valuable aspect of Dell PowerEdge M is the time of consolidation. It allows us to consolidate our infrastructure very efficiently, enabling us to deploy eight servers in a seven-unit density. This setup provides us a unified interface for management, allowing us to manage several rack servers from the same interface. The consolidation provides good compute and memory performance across the board.

One area for improvement is the connectivity, specifically the backplate and switch connections. Currently, for direct-attached connections to storage arrays, we need to install two switches to connect. A more intuitive setup interface could enhance user experience as well.

I have been using Dell PowerEdge M with the first generation and series for about 12 to 13 years.

I rate the stability of the solution very highly, around nine out of ten.

Scalability is straightforward within the same generation or class, yet becomes difficult if the server exceeds three years in age due to software version compatibility issues.

Customer service and support in Tunisia are quite good, and I would rate them nine out of ten.

Positive

We have used other solutions. For example, Lenovo does not have strong support in Tunisia, whereas Health Packard Enterprise provides good technical support but is more expensive.

The initial setup is somewhat complex. A more intuitive and unified setup interface would significantly enhance the initial experience.

Pricing is relatively high. I would rate it as a six. It is somewhat expensive but manageable.

Besides Dell, Health Packard Enterprise and Lenovo are possible evaluations. They each have their own limitations.

Overall, I have a positive experience, and my customers have had good experiences as well. Some of my customers have been using Dell PowerEdge M solutions for fifteen years. 

I would rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

We use Dell PowerEdge M for data center consolidation. If a customer requests, we position the blade server to save the cabling or electricity.

The solution's most valuable features are centralized monitoring and management and the ease of upgrading firmware. Dell PowerEdge M has enhanced our virtualization and containerization.

Cisco UCS X-series provides a GPU node and compute node in a single chassis. Dell PowerEdge M lacks GPU nodes and doesn't have a direct solution for GPUs.

I have been using Dell PowerEdge M for three years.

Dell PowerEdge M is a stable solution. Once it's installed, the solution operates without any maintenance.

Our clients for Dell PowerEdge M are medium and enterprise businesses.

The solution provides very good technical support.

Positive

Cisco is better than Dell PowerEdge M.

The initial setup of the solution is not straightforward but a little complex. By default, if the switching comes with 100G or 40G, then we need to split it to 10G or 25G as per the requirement. All these configurations are complex in Dell PowerEdge M as compared to Cisco.

In Cisco, we have a GUI or something called Intersight, which allows us to graphically select the ports and deploy them to the corresponding speed. We lack those interfaces in Dell and need to do it in the command line.

One architect and an engineer can install and configure the solution in two to three days.

The solution's pricing is slightly higher. However, we don't require an additional license for it. The solution's pricing depends on the customer's connectivity requirements, whether 10G, 25G, or 100 G.

The solution is scalable, and you can add multiple chassis. You don't need to worry about the physical cabling or the number of switchboards. It can be easily scaled based on the requirement. When we calculate other factors like power and cooling, we'll get savings by the end of the third or fourth year. One person can easily maintain the solution. We faced no challenges integrating Dell PowerEdge M into our existing infrastructure.

Dell PowerEdge M should have GPU addition or future scalability. Cisco claims a ten-year life cycle, wherein its product will support new technology like GPU and water cooling for ten years. However, Dell PowerEdge M lacks that part regarding future enhancements and adaptation to new technologies like water cooling.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We used it for normal Windows servers before, in my previous client. They used it for regular Windows clients, and they have a significant infrastructure.

I have explored the new iDRAC features. It's similar to what we have in HP as well.

Using the iDRAC feature makes server management much easier for this type of setup. It's quite useful.

Perhaps the processor needs some improvement in terms of processing features. If I remember correctly, the Intel Xeon processor shipped with the Dell PowerEdge M is the 6426Y.

This processor is a 16-core processor that can handle around 32 threads. Now, the HP server we are considering has a 6430 processor, which is 32 cores. It can handle 64 threads. So it's twice as much as the Dell PowerEdge M. However, the memory module, the DDR4-4800, is the same.

But according to reviews and online sources, the memory performance is much better on the Dell PowerEdge. That's where the confusion arises.

Another area of improvement could be scalability. 

I have been working as a system admin for 15 years. So, we used Dell PowerEdge M in the past. 

We had Dell PowerEdge M ranging from the 2900 to the 2950 models. We have the 360 G5, G6, G7, and the 380 G7. And later on, we started virtualizing the environment.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

If we consider the end users, it would be more than 10,000. This setup is for the Ministry of Education, specifically for a college.

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. 

Our clients are planning to upgrade the system infrastructure with Cisco Blades. They want to move away from the complexity of managing other servers.

The initial setup is easy. 

In my current client's environment, but they are more inclined towards Cisco servers and have a large infrastructure based on Cisco blades. They have three different clusters with individual hosts, and they primarily use Hyper-V rather than VMware.

The processor performance is better on the HP, while Dell has an advantage in terms of memory performance. The client is having trouble deciding which one to go for.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. I have worked with the older servers. Even though they were quite old, they performed well because it has been a long time since we acquired Dell servers. I purchased Dell PowerEdge R730 or Dell PowerEdge R740. In general, the parts are reasonably priced compared to other products. They are easy to manage. And I strongly believe that the parts are of better quality.

We use the solution for hyper-converged infrastructures with VMware and physical/virtual SQL solutions. 

Both Dell and Cisco would be data center modernization. We're modernizing from a three-tier to a single infrastructure. 

The enterprise manager feature sets are great. It's great for managing overall infrastructure. 

It is scalable. 

The setup is fine if you have some expertise.

It offers average pricing.

They are pretty much all the same in terms of what this solution versus competitors offers. Cisco is number one, HP Synergy is number two, and this solution would be number three.

I'm more into PowerEdge R-600, 700, and 800 series instead of blades. 

Technical support is not good. 

I've used the solution for a couple of years from a presales perspective.

I'd rate the stability at a five or six out of ten. 

The scalability is fine. It's blade infrastructure. You just basically plug into converged switches. It isn't a single pane of glass for management. You don't have the feature set that HPE and Cisco have with the fabric interconnects and everything. You still can scale up, however.

I've never had a good experience with technical support. 

Negative

I've used Cisco and HP as well.

The initial setup is a bit more complex unless you are really savvy with Dell. I'm more used to HP and Cisco. Other engineers handle Dell-centric blade solutions. We've been migrating off Dell blades to HPE and Cisco. 

It is possible to get an ROI from this solution. I probably wouldn't say you'd get an ROI from Cisco or HPE.

I'd rate the pricing as average. It's not terrible. The lead times over Cisco and HPE are weeks as opposed to months. 

I'd advise potential new users that they need to have experience with PowerEdge and management to understand all of the features on offer.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.