Cisco UCS Manager vs. IntelliMagic Vision for SAN

It [Cisco UCS Manager] is extremely well suited to large virtual infrastructure environments with resource dense blades. This solution is also great if you want to consolidate a large number of servers (if they are servers that need to stay physical, but can fit in the profile of a blade) - this would reduce data center space utilization as well as power and cooling. Cisco UCS Manager is also great if you're looking for centralized management of a larger number of servers. This would not be a great solution if you have a very small shop - it's not cheap and probably wouldn't give you a ROI if you only have a couple dozen servers total. I'd say it would be overkill for small shops, but if you have the money and don't care, you'll still like it.

Incentivized

One of our SAN switches was experiencing high utilization and we were able to determine which slot and port on the switch was the problem using Intellimagic's reporting feature showing the top x utilization ports. IntelliMagic Vision for SAN reporting provided granular level data making it easy to work on the problem at hand.

Incentivized

• It is very all inclusive for management of every part our our Cisco blade center.
• It allows us to directly connect to a hardware-based server in the blade center as though we were physically at the console.
• It allows us to monitor the entire system for faults.
• It lets us manage connectivity.
• It is set to alert us via email if a fault occurs.

Incentivized

• Performance metrics for multiple vendors and equipment models
• Stability and reliability of the system
• Ease of report creation

• Automation: There is a simple power-shell CMD lets, but it leaves more to be desired.
• Navigation: Navigating the interface can be confusing.
• Integration: Integration with ESXi hosts while doing FW upgrades would be hugely beneficial without the need for additional tools.

Incentivized

• I have not come across any

Incentivized

Cisco UCSM Support has been very quick to reply and address our concerns, issues, and questions. We have found that Cisco's documentation is clear and concise and fairly easy to find. With Cisco support's help, we are able to quickly and safely meet the demands of our end-users, consistently.

Incentivized

I think UCS Manager would be able very comparable to other vendors offerings when it comes to server configuration. I think Cisco did a good job in giving you full access to many options that you might not see with Dell or HPE. Every manufacturer would need a similar tool to control their server environment, but I think what Cisco has built into their Manager is a little better than others I've used. You can just see and change so many settings. I would say that is also a bit of a negative by a little bit because sometimes it is hard to dig in and find what you need to change and often might need to reach out to TAC or take a training course to understand all of the interface.

Incentivized

Broadcom SANnav is being used as well but it has a different scope of features

• The positive is I was able to consolidate my small server infrastructure from 3 racks to one rack giving me space back and much power savings
• The negative would be it could feel a little daunting to manage as there are many tabs and pieces to the interface.

Incentivized

• Eliminated multiple reporting sources and consolidated to one