Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers Reviews

The solution is reliable and easy to use. 

The capacity is quite small, so I need the CPU performance to be a bit higher. The memory is also limited, and we cannot upgrade more. The solution needs more capacity and more scalability. 

I have been working with this product for three years.

The product is scalable. Currently, we have six people working with it in our company. 

The technical support from Cisco is fair. 

I have used HP and Dell servers before. The products are pretty similar, but we use them for different purposes. 

The initial setup was easy. It was not complex. It took around two hours, including the installation of the operating system. 

We handled the implementation with help from the local vendor. 

The price for Cisco is a bit higher than its competitors. We paid 40k for one server. We paid 50% at the time of the purchase order and 50% after the product was delivered. 

I would rate this solution as a nine out of ten. 

We are a system integrator and this is one of the products that we implement for our clients.

They are for general, mixed usage that includes use cases such as virtualization and hosting VMware.

The warranty and support periods should be extended. One of the things that we like about Dell and HPE is the longer duration of support.

What we would really like to see is more years of extended support. If somebody wants to extend it to five years or seven years, this should be possible because some of our customers really want it.

We have been working with this product for between five and six years.

This is a stable product and we plan to continue working with it in the future.

This product is scalable and is typically installed on-premises for customers who are small to medium-sized businesses. We have dozens of clients who use it.

Technical support is good and we don't have a problem with it, although they have a shorter support cycle for their products.

We work with several vendors including Dell and HPE. When it comes to Dell, the warranty period is generally longer compared to Cisco.

The initial setup is straightforward and easy to do. It is not complex at all.

It does not take much time to deploy.

Our in-house team deploys this solution to our customers. Not many people are required for deployment. Two people might be used for racking and stacking, and one person for the configuration.

This product is slightly more expensive when compared to others.

We do not deal with the latest version because we find that for rack servers, the previous version is a little better. Manageability is not a big option for this type of server.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Cisco UCS C-Series Rack can be used as an entry-level server for small database servers, and active directory servers, which are to be visualized with VMware.

The most valuable feature of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack is the use of databases, such as MySQL.

Cisco UCS C-Series Rack could improve by selling storage. Cisco doesn't sell storage, which is a problem because some customers ask for storage. There are several brands in the market, such as HPE, and Dell EMC. However, Cisco doesn't have any storage. This is where the tension comes from buying this solution.

If you buy a Dell server, you want Dell storage, if you want HPE, you want HPE storage. Other suppliers sell compatible Cisco storage but not one made by Cisco.

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

Cisco UCS C-Series Rack is stable.

The scalability of the Cisco UCS C-Series Rack is good.

The support from Cisco UCS C-Series Rack has been very good.

I rate the support from Cisco UCS C-Series Rack a five out of five.

The initial setup of the Cisco UCS C-Series Rack is easy.

To deploy one server, we only need one engineer. For larger deployment, the number of people we need depends on many factors.

The price of the Cisco UCS C-Series Rack could improve. It's a little more expensive in comparison with Dell or HPE solutions.

My advice to others wanting to purchase this solution is only to purchase what you need because it is an expensive solution. However, they are very good servers.

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

We use Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers for Cisco CallManager, and business application hosting.

The most valuable features of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers are agileness, ease of operation, and manageability.

Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers could improve integration with third-party solutions.

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 good.

Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers' basic installation and commissioning are easy.

We have a team that does the implementation of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers.

The prices of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers are higher compared to the competition. When we try and sell against the competition, then it becomes quite difficult to sell

Our clients have enjoyed the solutions.

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

There is always room and scope for improvement.

The product's stability and delivery time could be better. 

I have been using the product for one month. 

The solution is scalable. My company has around 400 users for the product. 

The tool's deployment is not complex. It took around two to three days for the installation to complete. 

My company has an agreement with Cisco to get discounted rates. It is one of the reasons why we chose the product. 

I would rate the product a ten out of ten. 

We are using it for our IP telephony. We use it for internal communication in terms of making calls, instant messaging, and one-on-one video calling. We also use it when we're working from home remotely. We also use Cisco Jabber as well as Expressway for Firewall Traversal.

In terms of the software, we're using the latest version. In terms of the hardware, we are two generations behind. We simply did a software upgrade on the old hardware.

It is very stable and easy to use. It integrates easily with Cisco's cloud-based UC solutions. There are tools for management that make the management a bit easier, but we don't use them. We don't use what you would term as power users.

On the contact center and video conferencing, I would definitely like to see more AI features. The AI features are key for us. You will find a lot of them in the cloud-based solution, but in the on-premises solution, they're hardly there. I would like to see the same AI features that are there in the cloud-based Cisco UC.

We've been using it for ten years.

It is a very stable product.

It is highly scalable. We have ten people in our office, and we have deployed it for our use. Our biggest customer has about 4,000 users, but you can scale it to 40,000 users. 

We provide technical support ourselves. There are a few instances where we have to refer to a Cisco technical support person.

The installation is straightforward. Normally, the installation takes four to six hours.

We are an integrator. We implement it for ourselves and for customers. It is easy for us.

I would definitely recommend this solution. We plan to keep using this solution. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Excellent server solution with incredible network throughput. 

It has centralized our server management and allows us to treat servers like a pool of resources instead of discrete devices.

Boot from SAN allows us to standardize all of our servers to boot up drives to the storage area network.

Not sure about the newest UCS Manager.

In the version we need to use, the manager is still reliant on a full Java install on a Windows OS. This is inconvenient and problematic if you have multiple management tools on different versions of Java or if you move to a machine without the appropriate Java environment.

Best to buy all the blades configured for the same purposes of load balancing and failover or load shifting.

The Cisco solution has improved the new infrastructure development giving us the ability to create a compute-storage in-a-box solution.

It is very nice and stable with an easy administration GUI. It has reliable and compliant hardware components which are not "Cisco rebranded."

Definitely the support area needs improving. Especially the time response in case of hardware failure.

We only had hardware issues from two disk failures.

Absolutely we had scalability issues. We tried several times to upgrade, scale up, expand our infrastructure, but Cisco insists to demand excessive amounts of money. Much more than buying a new infrastructure. This behavior forced us to choose another vendor later and we downgraded of course the role of our Cisco infrastructure.

Ι would say the technical support is average. Nothing special.

It was a difficult decision but we switched for two reasons - better value-for-money approach and more compatible hardware.

It was very easy and straightforward and it was done without previous experience.

I would advise to be very careful regarding the pricing especially if they don't buy complete or all included bundles. If they plan to expand their infrastructure in periods, then simply Cisco is not a good choice.

We evaluated HPE DL380 and Dell R730

Update the system with the latest firmware set. There are plenty of fixes.