HPE BladeSystem is a brand of blade server, from Hewlett-Packard Enterprise. HPE blades include the ProLiant BL series and the ProLiant WS series.
N/A
Supermicro SuperBlade
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
SuperBlade is a high density x86 Multi-Node Server for Enterprise Cloud, HPC Applications, from Supermicro. They are available in 8U, 6U and 4U enclosures with hot-swap NVMe support, with air or direct liquid cooling.
N/A
Pricing
HPE BladeSystem
Supermicro SuperBlade
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
HPE BladeSystem
Supermicro SuperBlade
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
HPE BladeSystem
Supermicro SuperBlade
Considered Both Products
HPE BladeSystem
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose HPE BladeSystem
Incorporating HPE Blades Systems In order to house 16 physical servers, you just need 10 rack units instead of 32, which reduces the amount of heat produced and, in turn, the cost to cool the site. To have multiple Esx servers that can all be managed centrally, VMware …
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 …
Within our organization, HPE BladeSystem enjoyed widespread recognition. Also, HPE Apollo can't make advantage of Virtual Connect, so every Apollo server needs to be hardwired into the LAN. That has far-reaching consequences for the network portal. We would then need to install …
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. …
Within our organization, the HPE BladeSystem was a widely
recognized brand. We're a customer/end-user. Working with the blade server is
fun, and it's easy to keep track of everything. On a scale from one to
Our use of HPE BladeSystem goes back a long way. Previously we had a solution of IBM blades, however, it is not very comparable in terms of time. We recently acquired the HPE Synergy solution, which is essentially an evolution of the HPE BladeSystem. Market solutions such as …
We only have evaluated and compared the HPE Apollo Server system. Is also a very decent system, but when it comes to network connections, HPE Blade with Virtual Connect has a big advantage. We can connect around 24 server in a two-Blade chassis with 8 x 50 GBe Ethernet Ports …
HPE BladeSystem was a well known product in our company. Also HPE Apollo is not able to use Virtual Connect, what means that you have to connect every Apollo Server to the Network. That has a huge impact on the network site.
We tested Cisco UCS in its early days, so this might be a bit of an old comparison, but UCS had the promise of being very configurable, with templates for everything and automatable for just about every task. However, even working with a Cisco engineer for weeks, we could not …
BladeSystem provides a close experience to the UCS B-Series. UCS B-Series has a few capabilities within the network fabric that exceed what is capable on BladeSystem, but HPE has developed a lot of orchestration within HPE OneView to offer feature parity or even go beyond what …
The supermicro superblade servers are performing really well on our infrastructure, we are running a broad set of applications: voip, JAVA, linux, windows, hypervisors, etc. They are easy to install and configure and the price is a winning situation.
HPE BladeSystem is functional for standard Windows and ESXi host usage. Although the design is over a decade old, its parts are up to current with today's processors and networks. BladeSystem is not suitable for applications that necessitate local storage, hyper-converged, or any other type of specialized PCI cards. Some of these use cases are better suited to the HPE Synergy platform, however that design is not without its own limitations.
Supermicro may be well suited if what you will be deploying on the servers is supported, because if you don't, you may have no support at all. In our case, we have had some hardware problems where the support is not efficient compared to other experiences we had (HP, DELL). On the other hand, their servers price is quite good, so it's a win win if you are looking for better prices than other vendors.
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.
My experience with the support was not that good, it always takes a lot of time to get somewhere when raising a support case. I gave it a 6 because I think they have room for improvement here, It could be good if they would act quicker and send in replacements for faulty hardware.
Incorporating HPE Blades Systems In order to house 16 physical servers, you just need 10 rack units instead of 32, which reduces the amount of heat produced and, in turn, the cost to cool the site. To have multiple Esx servers that can all be managed centrally, VMware virtualization is a must. HPE Blade Systems simplify the administration of several servers. You can develop pretty great projects with Onboard admin and Virtual connect. Virtualization is the best option.
The supermicro superblade servers are performing really well on our infrastructure, we are running a broad set of applications: voip, JAVA, linux, windows, hypervisors, etc. They are easy to install and configure and the price is a winning situation. On the other hand, The support is not so good, HP and DELL are stronger in this point. If you get any failures on your systems, they will replace them immediately, but supermicro will ask for a lot of information on the case before handing out replacement hardware, which makes it slow.
The number of ports required for connectivity to 16 physical server is reduced with BladeSystem, without compromising flexibility - so there is a 16x savings on the number of ports required on physical switching infrastructure.
In-place upgrades to newer hardware are accommodated by virtualized MAC addresses and WWN's in the fabric of the BladeSystem.
On a couple occasions, large scale outages have affected the environment because of an issue at the core of BladeSystem. Users should be aware of the fault domain caused by a single chassis and plan accordingly. Our issues were mitigated due to a second, separate chassis where we spread workloads.
