We've been using HPE BladeSystem for quite some time. Dell PowerEdge was the previous option, but they were slow compared to the new system. The HPE Synergy solution, which is essentially an upgraded version of the HPE BladeSystem, was recently bought by our company. …
We chose Dell PowerEdge R series because we need to consolidate a lot of physical load into a smaller number of nodes. Their hardware configuration, specifically for vSAN helps us achieve a high-density load in a very low number of physical servers. On top of that, they have lots of expansion ports, so we can increase our load internally on each other with simple upgrades.
All nodes can be managed centrally through the ILO interface. Users and services alike benefit from the lightning-fast response time. Enable service continuity during VM migration between nodes. The purchase of a blade system is something we endorse as a viable alternative for your business. In order for the convergent system to work, the architecture can be adapted to accommodate new devices, and by applying new modules, both the technology and the system's responsiveness to demands for high availability can be enhanced.
Good price - Compared to other vendors’ server platforms. In our scenario (virtualization) we found out PowerEdge offers the best price/vCPU and RAM ratio.
Customizable - We were able to select optimal memory/disk capacity for our use case. Other platform's minimum requirements were above our needs, hence needlessly expensive.
Good warranty and service - Our project did not involve creating a big cluster with a lot of spare capacity, so the next business day warranty came handy.
The small form factor of a blade server cannot accommodate expansion cards.
Shared infrastructure, like the interconnects, means a larger fault domain.
Firmware updates can be disruptive and administrators should pay close attention to firmware recipes and bundles to ensure compatibility between components.
We do not intend to make new investments in HPE BladeSystem as it is in the end-of-life phase and we have continued with the new HPE Synergy environment. It is therefore not a process of discarding, but of evolution. This environment will possibly continue to be used in the institution, but for less critical purposes and more related to the development of new solutions.
The Dell PowerEdge R range is just intuitive when you have skills engineers managing them in-house, although even with new members of staff on the team, the learning curve is very low providing they have previous general service hardware management experience. From the specification through to the management of this range, the usability is excellent.
We consider Dell's support to be best-in-class compared to other solutions and is also reasonably priced. Their SLA targets have almost always been met, except for minor occasions that have had extenuating circumstances. The service staff is also professional and thorough. Overall, we are very satisfied with the level of support we receive.
PowerEdge R servers was selected by CIO. I think the servers have lots of benefits for our company and are well placed on our projects. In most business cases they are working good and our management have a clear vision to upgrade them to the same brand with better specs. Hope to see this upgrade in close future.
It's been said that BladeSystem is very similar to the UCS B-Series. While the network fabric features of the UCS B-Series outshine those of the BladeSystem, HPE has created extensive orchestration within HPE OneView to provide feature parity with and even surpass those of the UCS B-Series. The fundamental distinction between the two is whether the focus is on the computing (BladeSystem) or the fabric (UCS). In contrast to UCS's tight fabric integration, BladeSystem's centralized focus on servers simplifies administration.
From the perspective of physical server consolidations, when servers spread across multiple branch and remote offices are gathered into a central data center, this simplification process provides ROI in several ways. One, the configuration control, restriction of server access.
Reduce complexity and enable greater standardization of hardware purchases, which lowers costs.
Increased security of the move are important.
The costs of moves, add-ins, and changes are reduced, as well as the costs of travel time and maintenance.
Migrating legacy operating systems to a newer version via rehosting brings similar ROI benefits when it comes to server consolidation.
