Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers Reviews

I use the solution for routing. 

The C-series is the most valuable. 

The improvement should be done as per customer requirements. 

I have been using Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers for four years. 

It is a highly stable solution. 

It is a highly scalable solution. Twenty four users are using the solution. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

The initial setup is easy. It's just create a script and then you upload it. The deployment takes two to three hours. 

The solution is moderately priced. 

I would rate the overall solution a nine out of ten. 

Cisco rack servers are very easy to integrate with other products from different vendors.

Generally, the solution performs well, but some customers have complained about delivery time. So, the main weakness is the lead time.

We provide Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers to our customers. However, the lead time for these servers, as well as for the switches, has been very long since COVID. So some people are looking at other products because of that.

The solution is very reliable and performs well. The customers never had any problems with them.

Scalability is okay. The solution offers good scalability.

I've heard some complaints because Cisco didn't have a dedicated company to manage the accounts. They used to be very vigilant in customer service, but once they were acquired, the customer experience has not been so good, especially regarding technical support.

Neutral

The solution is very easy to deploy.

For a typical deployment, with the right information, it should take about 2-3 weeks. However, if you need to customize the servers or deploy them in a complex environment, it could take longer.

The pricing is expensive. Compared to its competitors, Cisco servers are more expensive. The price of Cisco servers can vary depending on the configuration, the number of servers being purchased, the amount of RAM, and the storage capacity.

We are working with Cisco, Fortinet, Palo Alto, and all the popular options. We work with everything Cisco offers, like switches, routers, firewalls, and email security.

I would recommend them as long as they have the budget for it, but exploring other options is also worthwhile.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. In terms of the product itself, I don't think they need to add any features. However, they could improve the delivery charge and technical support price.

The primary use case of this solution is to help manage our infrastructure within our data center service.

The solution has improved our organization by easily integrating with our VMware and storage solutions.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the expansion and replacement of parts.

The solution can be improved by adjusting the cost.

I have been using the solution for seven years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

The support team is good, responsive, and helpful.

Positive

Before using the solution we used Dell and HP solutions and we switched because of a suggestion from our technology partner.

The initial setup is straightforward and takes a couple of hours. 

The implementation was completed through a vendor team.

The solution requires an annual licensing fee.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

The solution can be implemented by one person in a couple of hours.

We currently have 1000 people using the solution.

I recommend the solution to others.

Its hardware is really reliable. We also like Cisco for its support.

Its accessibility and manageability can be improved. Currently, we have to visit the office to manage it. It should be manageable outside our network. I would like it to be on the cloud.

I have been using this solution for almost three years.

It is stable.

It is scalable. We have around 200 users.

Their technical support is good. Their response time is also good. I don't have any problem with their support.

We were using HP ProLiant. After migrating to the Cisco network, we are using Cisco products. For our server also, we preferred Cisco.

The vendor installed the product. The vendor and our system administrator worked together. It took us three days to deploy. 

Cisco is expensive, but we didn't look at the cost of the product. We were looking at reliability and support.

I would definitely recommend this solution. When you hear the brand Cisco, you don't really need to recommend it. For me, it is the number one brand for network devices and servers. Cisco is always there in Gartner Magic Quadrant.

I would rate Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers a nine out of ten. They just need the ability to be managed on the cloud.

The most valuable feature of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is server management.

Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers could improve by adding a wider portfolio because they only have two main categories, the C-220 and 240. There is no wide range of options as other solutions have, such as Dell. Additionally, if it was more flexible with the configuration it would be good.

I have been using Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers for approximately 10 years

Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers are stable.

The scalability of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is okay. However, we do not have many options in this category.

We have enterprise-sized customers using this solution.

The support from Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers has been satisfactory. However, not all of the support agents have the same level of knowledge. We can experience some delays in having a response because the issue we are facing has to be escalated to the next level of agent for support.

We did not have any issues with the initial setup of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers. The process takes approximately 30 minutes.

I do the implementation of this solution for our customers.

The price of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is approximately 20 percent more than other solutions.

When comparing this solution to others, I prefer Dell. Dell is more flexible and technical support is more accessible here in Egypt because they have a technical support office here. Additionally, Dell has a wider array of options that we don't have in Cisco.

The intersite options for management make life easier for the operations and management teams because it's a single point of management for the whole server infrastructure.

I rate Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers an eight out of ten.

The solution is primarily used for storage. When I came into the company, I found it already in use. The company contacted the provider to renew its infrastructure. The providers offered this solution, and the company approved it. When I arrived, they were already using that.

It's very easy to operate the solution. It's quite user-friendly. 

The product doesn't take up too much space on the rack and I like that.

The scalability is very good.

The solution is quite stable.

The pricing is reasonable if you are an enterprise organization.

Something about the storage is somewhat lacking. They should work to improve and expand it. I almost prefer EMC's setup more.

Technical support could be more responsive. 

I've been using the solution for about five years at this point. It's been a while.

The product's performance is good. The stability is there. We haven't dealt with it crashing or freezing. We haven't had bugs or glitches.

The solution is capable of scaling.

I've found that it is hard to get a hold of technical support. I'd like them to be more helpful and responsive. I'm not completely satisfied with the level of service we receive.

We currently also use EMC storage.

I can't speak to the implementation process as the product was already installed prior to my arrival at the company. I didn't participate in the process and therefore cannot comment on how easy or difficult it might have been. I can't speak to how long it takes to deploy either.

The pricing is fair. It is an enterprise solution, however. The price might be a bit less if the organization is a bit smaller.  

I used Dell servers in past and comparing them with UCS, I would definitely recommend UCS over Dell.

We're just customers and end-users. We don't have a business relationship with Cisco.

I'd recommend the solution. We've been quite happy with its capabilities so far. 

I'd rate the solution, on a scale from one to ten, at a nine. It's been pretty seamless in terms of usage. I have no real complaints.

We provide the solution to our customers as per their requirements. Our customers are using the server, and they highly recommend it.

The server can be configured easily.

The product must add customer-friendly monitoring features.

I have been working with the solution for more than nine years. I am using the latest version of the solution.

The tool has high stability.

I rate the tool’s scalability a nine out of ten.

We require technical and pre-sale support.

Positive

The initial setup was easy. I rate the ease of setup a ten out of ten. It is an enterprise-level solution.

Compared to HPE and Dell, the commercial aspect of the product is on the higher side. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

Our customers' primary use case is for hosting virtual machines. It could be a white solution. It could be service, and it could be their applications.

The first advantage of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is that you don't need to buy physical hardware like I used to have to do for each application. It is just software or operating systems. Now you have to buy one physical server which will host multiple virtual machines. It saves a lot on space, power, and management. If you're installing a VMware ESXi server on the UCS servers, the central servers are not there. So if you're using a V-Center ESXi server with multiple servers, you can manage the VMs plus you can have stand by storage in case one of them goes down.

It depends on your mission. We've started working on the other UC servers so there is no hardware dependency. If something goes, you can retrieve it from other servers so downtimes are minimized and the failure gets fixed fast, within minutes. Then you have a backup option. You can take a backup virtual machine. In case you install some patches or something that causes a server to go down, you can install it from the backups.

In terms of the features that I have found most valuable, that is the hardware, which is more dynamic. Cisco has the channels for the people to buy it. It has the red configurations, you can have more RAM and their CPUs have more code, depending on what kind of server you have, because there are three or four variations. So those options are available. Most of the customers we deal with have a smaller setting, like a voice solution. So they want the Cisco Call Manager. They go for the C 220 version, where they can employ two or three servers and two or three virtual machines, not the physical server. And they can get their voice setup working. If the customer is looking for more servers and more options, they go for more hardware, and a higher version of that server, such as 220, 240, and the like.

In terms of what could be improved, they could add their SSD drives instead of the normal, disc drives. That's the one thing.

I have worked on both UC C-Series and E-Series servers. I used  E-Series servers when I was employed in Cisco. I worked on UC Series servers while I was managing the data center NetOne, which is located in Zambia, Africa.

In total I have worked on Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers for four years.

In terms of stability, I think it's mostly stable. The only thing I found as I started this phase is that you just need to wait for the replacement from Cisco, if you have the support for that server. Apart from that, I don't see any problems with the hardware on the E-Series and C-Series. Most of the cases with hardware or some software issues, the customer doesn't have the Smart Net account to get it fixed. That's why it gets delayed.

I remember one issue with the UC C-Series which I was troubleshooting last year when the software upgrade on one module in the E-Series for the phone had some problem. It was looping and kept on booting and the customer didn't have any support. It was difficult to resolve that issue.

Otherwise, I don't find many problems. I don't think we need many people managing it. There are no day-to-day issues with the physical hardware. The physical hardware barely has any problems throughout the year. Maybe once or twice. You may need to update the firmware for any bugs or any segregation of phones. Apart from that, I don't find any issues. Even if the power goes off it doesn't create any errors or any issues.

The E-Series' scalability is limited. In E-Series, it can be scaled up by adding additional blades, or you can buy another UC server. But with the C-Series, apart from available hardware space, you don't have many options to scale it.

I think the C-Series is 64GB or 120GB RAM and maybe two or three terabytes for processors. That's what I remember right now. The one server can support that. If you have more, you have capacity issues, and then you have to buy another server.

Yes, I have used Smart Net. But I have rarely reported an issue with them.

I think nowadays Cisco tech support is not that good.

Sometimes you receive different solutions from different people. If they are not on the same page, if you're working with one tech engineer and they have gone off shift and you get another tech engineer, he may give you different answers or different solutions than what the previous engineer was talking about. But this is not specific to the UCS, but a general issue with Cisco retail work and open stack cases. I found them inconsistent.

The first time you're doing the setup it is a little complex. But the second time is much easier. So I don't find any issues.

In terms of the physical server, it doesn't need much because it comes packed with everything, including RAM and processors. In some cases it may come separately so you have to open the server and put the processor, Ram and hard disk into the server. That's the only thing. After this is done, you have to install the hypervisor. Then there is the application, the virtual machines and things that they take over.

One server should not take more than one or two hours if your rack has big enough space and you have the railings. It should not take much time for mounting and powering on.

I think the pricing is high. Cisco has to look for bundling this solutions with other applications. They could sell basic options of the UC server along with other Cisco products and software. That would work. But as a standalone product, the customer looks at the price and it means they may not buy it when they see other products with the same construction at a lower price.

I don't have any problems with the Cisco UC series. It serves its purpose.

I think their products are good. The only thing Cisco needs to work on is the cost part.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers an eight.