HPE ProLiant DL Servers Reviews

It is mainly an x86 Intel server. There are some versions of AMD processors as well. You can use it for many purposes. You can use it as a web server, a backup server, a database server, or an application server. You can use it for any main purpose for which you need a server.

It is mainly on-premises, but you can also deploy it in a cloud.

It is very stable. This is the feedback that I'm getting from my customers for the hardware. It is also 100% scalable.

HPE is also very specialized when it comes up to the server industry. It is not only about the rack servers; it is also about the blade servers. They were the first ones to bring these to the market more than ten years ago. 

It has something called WorldView. They should do some enhancement over WorldView to run an operating system as a code. Such a feature would be amazing for running multiple servers. They are already working on this, and they can enhance the existing versions for this.

It should also be cheaper. It is currently expensive.

I have been selling this solution for almost six years.

It is very stable.

It is 100% scalable. We have about a hundred customers.

I don't directly get in touch with them, but I haven't heard anything bad about it.

The initial setup is not complicated for HPE or any other server.

It is expensive. Its price should be better.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate HPE ProLiant DL Servers an eight out of ten.

We have installed VMware on DL Server, and the operating system sits on this DL Server host.

This is all I've ever used. These servers are strong, and they have very few failures on them. They are also easy to manage and monitor.

They are pretty solid servers, but, just like all servers, they become obsolete after some time.

They can maybe provide a console to monitor the health of the servers. There should be some kind of console to which you can log in to remotely check on the health of a server, even when the server is off.

The servers that we have are only scalable to some extent. They have got a limited amount of hard drive that you can insert. Their scalability should be improved.

I have been using this solution for more than ten years.

They are pretty stable servers. The hardware failures are very minor. We do have one or two hardware failures but very far spaced. The major failures are mostly operating system failures, but on the hardware, they have been working pretty well.

They are scalable to some extent. For instance, you can only put a specific amount of hard drive on the base. You can insert the hard drives of a limited size, which makes them not very scalable. This could be dependent on the servers that you have. There are probably models that are more scalable than what we have.

We have about 200 people on the site, and they use it on a daily basis.

We have not contacted them. We didn't have any major issues to escalate. The few issues that we had were easily resolvable. You can also use online support to check. There are quite a number of people using these servers. You can share problems and get some advice from someone who has faced the same problem before.

We will be switching to a combination of Cisco and Dell EMC. For computation, it will be Cisco, and for storage, it will be Dell EMC. The main reason for this switch is group policy. The group has decided that we move from HP and use Cisco with EMC Storage.

The initial setup is a simple process. The old ones used to have a CD that would guide you through the process. Newer ones should also have a system where you go step-by-step and install your operating system and configure it.

I deployed it myself. I got servers from a company and then installed and configured them. All servers were not deployed at once. I deployed just one server at a time. Typically, deploying a server, including the operating system and everything else, takes less than two hours. I also do the maintenance.

Proliant DL Servers have a reasonable cost. They are not as expensive as the Cisco servers. Everything is included when you purchase a server. You just have to install and configure it.

I would recommend these servers. I would rate HPE ProLiant DL Servers a nine out of ten.

Our primary use for this product is our electronic faxing system. We have a number of applications that are hosted on it, working together.

The technical support could be a little faster.

We have been using HPE ProLiant DL Servers for three years. We started using the most recent version, Gen10, a year ago.

We have had our system working for between two and three years with no downtime. We plan to continue using it in the future.

We have about 300 end-users who log into the system to use our applications.

We have to extend our electronic access system for our sites, and we will be purchasing another ProLiant.

There is another team in our company who deals with technical support, and they have a lot of experience with the product. I can say that the support is very good, although it would be better if it were quicker.

We also have a similar solution by Dell, and I find that the ProLiant support is much better.

The initial setup is very easy. The ProLiant was complete, and we just had to plug it into power and check the hardware. We did not have to put in new parts, such as additional hard disks. They are made to order.

We have four or five engineers for maintenance.

This product is within our budget.

In summary, this is a good product and I can recommend it to others.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The main use for the last order was for the applications and other items around an electronic fencing system.

The initial setup is very easy.

The solution scales well.

The pricing of the product is fair and not too expensive.

The product is very stable.

The solution is pretty complete, for what I have seen over the past three years. I can't recall if I've felt that any features were lacking within that time.

The technical support is pretty good, however, they could be a bit faster and more responsive.

We've been using the solution for three years at this point.

The solution is quite stable. It's worked for two or three years with no downtime whatsoever. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's pretty reliable.

We haven't had any issues with scaling over the time we've had the solution. If a company needs to scale, it should be able to do so relatively easily.

We have about 300 users that log into the system at any given time.

We plan to increase usage. We have to extend our electronic fencing system to our other sites, and we will likely purchase another product from ProLiant when that happens.

There's another team for technical support. The technical support is very, very good and the experience in our organization has made us interested in buying more HP ProLiant. We're quite satisfied with the level of support they give to us.

While the company hasn't used a different solution, I personally have experience with Dell. I generally prefer to use HP instead.

The implementation is not complex at all. We find the initial setup to be quite straightforward.

The product was ordered and came complete and ready to go. It was basically plug and play, so that there really wasn't a deployment period per se. We just had to power it up and check the hardware. We put in the discs and had the spare parts on hand as well. They deliver it ready to go, so it's pretty fast.

We have five individuals that handle the implementation and maintenance. They are all engineers.

I don't consider it an expensive product. We're quite happy with the pricing so far. It's reasonable.

We're just customers. We don't have a business relationship with HP.

We're using the latest version of the solution. We purchased Gen 10 about a year or so ago.

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations.

Overall, I would rate the product at a nine out of ten.

The robustness of the design of the server is the most valuable. HP servers are easy to use and user-friendly. The server is not complicated, and it is easy to use ILO systems.

In DL 500 systems, the flow of air is not good enough, and some components get overheated. IBM systems have better airflow and scalability. 

We have a data center that has limited physical space. Therefore, we need to maximize the processing or compute systems that we use. In HP servers, such as DL 500, there are only four processors, whereas IBM servers, such as SR 916, have eight processors.

We don't get any support from HP because of our geographical location. We solve all problems ourselves by doing research on the internet. It would be good to get HP support.

We have been using HP products for six or seven years. We use HP Proliant DL 300 family and DL 500 family and blade servers like Enclosure C7000.

It works fine for general use or specific use of most enterprises, but for mission-critical servers, I don't think it is the best fit.

IBM systems have better scalability.

In our company, we have about 4,000 users. We also have a lot of outside users.

We haven't had any technical support yet because our country is not in the technical support area.

We have been using HP products from the beginning.

In the latest versions, such as G9 or G10, we have a very user-friendly installation. It took about 30 minutes to 1 hour. RAID is easy to install, and so is the server, but in earlier products or versions, it was somehow challenging. 

I deployed it myself. We have about six persons for the deployment and maintenance of the servers. They are system administrators for physical servers. For virtual environments, we have different teams to administer the use of our environment.

We have ILO licenses. We use this feature.

HPE ProLiant DL Servers are easy to use and suitable for mid-range users. HP has other products for enterprise users. I don't compare them with this family. We had the physical servers for all services, but now we are migrating to virtual servers using VMware.

I would rate HPE ProLiant DL Servers an eight out of ten.

The ProLiant server is where we install our monitoring tools. We are only utilizing about half of its total capacity. We need to install more memory and other hardware to maximize our usage. We're close to the minimum. We have around 20 users for this project across two departments. 

Our monitoring tool has a database, so we need a server with a fast IO. 

I have been using ProLiant servers for three years

The server hasn't failed in three years. Typically, it takes about five years before the power supply or hardware fails.

We configure the server as a standalone. It's not clustered to scale out. We are only just scaling up by installing additional RAM and other hardware as necessary.

At my old company, we used HPE's Blade server.

It's straightforward but requires a little more configuration than Dell because this HPE has an ILO where you can run an independent operating system. A system integrator deployed the server, which took less than a day. Our deployment and maintenance team consists of four engineers and one manager. We followed the installation guide and the standard steps for installing a Windows operating system.

Configuring the ILO operating system added some additional steps that weren't required with Dell. It's running Windows 7 ILO, a step higher than Dell's operating system.

I believe we have seen a return. However, the software accounts for the large cost, so ROI is difficult to calculate from a hardware perspective.

HPE ProLiant servers are priced about the same as Dell's, maybe a little more. 

I rate HPE ProLiant servers nine out of 10. I would recommend them if you live in an area where HPE has a strong support presence. In Qatar, HPE doesn't have as much support as Dell. I would recommend Dell if given the option because it has a solid local presence.

Our primary use case is focused on harmonizing databases. The method of deployment depends on our clients and their needs.

The size can be improved by making it a little slick. Additionally, we are at a disadvantage in support for people in African countries using the product because we don't have access to the support team 24/7. The solution has several support levels, such as essential and proactive support. They can extend support to African countries.

We have been using the solution for five years and are currently using the latest version.

The solution is stable.

The solution is highly scalable because the processor core is high to the extent of a dual processor. This means it can handle a heavy workload and virtualization. It's one of the best products that can be effective in a virtualized environment.

I rate the customer service and support an eight out of ten.

The initial setup took a few hours.

Implementation was in-house and required at least two or more people, depending on their level of expertise.

The pricing of the solution is high compared to other products.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good, but the processing power can be improved. I recommend the solution to people who are considering implementing it.

We have a three-tier infrastructure and our primary use case for this product is virtualization.

The most valuable feature is the tech support. They have a high level of expertise and they are fast.

We would like to see remote monitoring capabilities added. We are currently improving our automated monitoring for HPE servers using InfoSight.

We have been using HPE ProLiant DL Servers for more than five years.

The ProLiant DL Servers are stable and reliable.

This is a scalable product. We are using HPE Nimble Storage with it.

The technical support is very good.

The initial setup is easy.

We collaborated with HPE for our deployment. We purchased the initial support service, so it's a coordinated setup.

The pricing of these servers is fair. It is in the mid-range.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to purchase spare parts. The reason for this is that there is currently an electronic parts shortage. Any replacement components, such as a new hard disk, is very difficult to order and will have a long lead time. For this reason, I suggest ordering spare parts to have them in stock.

In summary, this is a good product, I'm content with it, and I recommend it for others.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.