We compared Cisco UCS Manager and Cisco Intersight based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Cisco UCS Manager is praised for its ease of use, robust management capabilities, integration with other Cisco products, advanced monitoring features, and efficient resource allocation. On the other hand, Cisco Intersight is lauded for its convergence into a single platform for cloud integration, scalability, and manageability. While UCS Manager offers enhanced customer service and support, Intersight lacks sufficient information in this aspect. Additionally, UCS Manager receives positive feedback on pricing, setup, licensing, and ROI, whereas such details are unavailable for Intersight. User feedback for UCS Manager suggests a need for UI enhancements, improved user experience, better documentation, troubleshooting resources, and performance optimization, while specific areas for improvement are unclear for Intersight.
Features: Cisco UCS Manager stands out for its ease of use, robust management capabilities, efficient resource allocation, and seamless integration with other Cisco products. On the other hand, Cisco Intersight offers convergence into a single platform for cloud integration, integration with other systems, an inside view of data centers and EdgeX nodes, and high manageability.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Cisco UCS Manager was deemed reasonable and straightforward, with fair and transparent licensing. On the other hand, the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Cisco Intersight are not provided, making it difficult to compare these aspects to UCS Manager., Cisco UCS Manager has shown a positive ROI with increased productivity, reduced costs, and improved performance. Cisco Intersight's ROI is difficult to determine based on the available data.
Room for Improvement: Cisco UCS Manager has room for improvement in its user interface design, navigation, organization of features, documentation, troubleshooting resources, performance issues, and installation process. In contrast, there are no specific areas for improvement identified for Cisco Intersight.
Deployment and customer support: Based on the user reviews, there is varying feedback on the duration required to establish a new tech solution with Cisco UCS Manager. Some users mention separate timeframes for deployment and setup, while others consider them to be the same period. However, feedback for Cisco Intersight is inconclusive, making it difficult to summarize the reviews., Cisco UCS Manager is known for its efficient and helpful customer service, with prompt assistance and knowledgeable staff. On the other hand, there is insufficient information available about the customer service and support of Cisco Intersight.
The summary above is based on 15 interviews we conducted recently with Cisco UCS Manager and Cisco Intersight users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Our organization uses Cisco Intersight since it helps manage our physical infrastructure."
"The product has good integration."
"Intersight can validate our environment."
"Cisco Intersight has valuable features for workflow automation and inventory administration."
"We enjoy having an inside view of all the data centers and all the EdgeX nodes within a single portal rather than going into the EdgeX connections one by one."
"The tool helps to manage Cisco servers."
"What I like most about Cisco Intersight is its manageability."
"Scalable portfolio of services for remote device management, with good cloud integration. It's also easy to set up."
"The solution is highly scalable, mainly because of the templates that make it easy for you to actually edit on the system."
"The hardware is very powerful and it is a stable solution."
"The management is one of the most valuable features of this solution."
"The most valuable features are flexibility and management."
"The interface is ergonomic and native. We can use UCS Manager to do all the configurations for the servers, including storage, networking, and all the other components we need inside the fabric. It's simple and flexible."
"When one server fails, we can attach the service profile to a new server, which saves a lot of time."
"I can deploy something in my 50-odd servers all in one go, in parallel, whereas if I was to do that individually, it could be a nightmare."
"I can quickly manage the provisioned servers."
"Cisco Intersight needs some improvement in terms of stability. Hybrid cloud management and proper hyperscaler tie-up are other areas for improvement."
"In the future, the solution needs to plan on an extension to cover a broader range of objects since, at present, there are some Cisco devices within the range of Intersight UCS that it can't manage."
"The product's setup should be easier."
"It's a very complex solution."
"The solution needs some enhancement in order to build the cluster in two nodes."
"The product could be easy to use."
"An area for improvement in Cisco Intersight is automation. It needs more automation capabilities. Apart from enhanced automation, I want Cisco Intersight to integrate with third-party monitoring tools in its next release."
"The usability must be better."
"The automation within the solution needs to be simplified."
"Cisco UCS is expensive compared to others. The Cisco UCS Chassis is more expensive than a standalone server, but some companies require standalone servers because of their production load and affordability. You need to pay more if you require more features on the Blade or if you need more ports on the switch."
"I want to be able to schedule multiple sequential updates in one go."
"The integration with other solutions could be better. I think Cisco can only integrate using Intersight. There is a second interface available as a SaaS platform, in the cloud, or on-premise. It's based on the Redfish protocol, which is standard for all the B-series servers in the market. We can integrate other solutions using API."
"There is room for improvement in the software part of Cisco UCS Manager. It should be more user-friendly, especially when creating policies."
"I found it a bit of a challenge to get training on UCSM. I've been trying to get that for some time now. I feel like I have to figure it out a lot of things myself. For years I've to log calls with support whenever I've got challenges that I cannot resolve. If I had some training or more manuals, I'd be better able to handle more things on my own."
"I would like to see Cisco UCS optionally work as a hyper-converged system because right now, it only operates as a converged system."
"Upgrading the firmware is a difficult procedure."
Cisco Intersight is ranked 26th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 10 reviews while Cisco UCS Manager is ranked 29th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 21 reviews. Cisco Intersight is rated 7.8, while Cisco UCS Manager is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Intersight writes "Scalable and easy to set up portfolio of services; good for remote device management and other functions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco UCS Manager writes "Used to manage servers, monitor or manage firmware upgrades, and push policies". Cisco Intersight is most compared with HPE OneView, IBM Turbonomic, Cisco UCS Director, VMware Aria Operations and VMware Aria Automation, whereas Cisco UCS Manager is most compared with Nutanix Prism, HPE OneView, Zabbix, Datadog and Moogsoft. See our Cisco Intersight vs. Cisco UCS Manager report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
