Dell PowerEdge M Reviews

The tool aims to serve as a hypervisor service for hosting virtual machines.

The tool's most valuable features are high availability and scalability. Its integration is easy. 

Dell PowerEdge M is stable. 

As we need to grow our infrastructure, we can add extra host servers, expand the memory, and increase components as necessary.

I haven't contacted the tool's support yet. 

The tool's deployment is easy and takes around two days to complete. 

The return on investment for us comes from its reliability and stability. The tool has been a good investment because they haven't experienced any downtime, and they keep everything running. 

The product is budget-friendly. The initial cost for each server was around 10,000 euros. It's a standard price, not too high or too low.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

We are using PowerEdge primarily in our infrastructure. We have an on-premises private cloud and a virtualization layer. We use PowerEdge for automation on the firmware, which provides alerting capabilities whenever there is an issue.

PowerEdge has high functionality, especially for automation on the firmware, which allows us to receive alerts for issues. 

The service and support from Dell have been excellent, typically providing resolution within four hours. Security features were initially a significant attraction, as Dell offered a lot of in-built security. The hardware is stable, which is essential due to the low outage rates.

The caching is a bit weak, which can make the hardware non-responsive, especially on hypervisor layers like ESXi or Hyper-V. Caching is vital for virtualization platforms, which is an area where PowerEdge is a little weaker.

We have been using it for more than five years.

The hardware is very stable. Outages are very rare with Dell products.

Scaling in is good, however, scaling out is where we faced some issues. PowerEdge servers are slightly challenging to scale out.

The support is good. That said, the account management needs to be strengthened.

Positive

I have used Lenovo, Cisco, IBM, and Dell previously. I initially chose Dell for their excellent service and support, many in-built security features, and stable hardware.

The initial setup is very simple and straightforward.

It's priced medium, however, recently the global pricing has increased by twelve percent. It would be beneficial for us if the pricing could be reduced by about eight percent.

We are currently using Dell, however, we need to have more discussions with Lenovo for more insights beyond what online searches offer.

Based on my experience, PowerEdge is suitable for all sizes of companies, especially beneficial for BFSI and enterprise-class companies. 

I rate PowerEdge ten out of ten.

Our primary use cases are mostly for compute and consolidation. If our customer needs to consolidate their existing infrastructure, they are using many applications, software, and databases, and they need a significant number of virtual machines. 

For instance, they might need fifty virtual machines, and they try to consolidate all of this on one chassis, great chassis, and maybe four or five blades to reach good compute and memory performance. This setup allows them to start and explore fifty or sixty machines on the same platform.

We are able to consolidate the infrastructure, which allows us to deploy a large number of virtual machines on a single chassis to enhance performance.

The most valuable aspect of Dell PowerEdge M is the time of consolidation. It allows us to consolidate our infrastructure very efficiently, enabling us to deploy eight servers in a seven-unit density. This setup provides us a unified interface for management, allowing us to manage several rack servers from the same interface. The consolidation provides good compute and memory performance across the board.

One area for improvement is the connectivity, specifically the backplate and switch connections. Currently, for direct-attached connections to storage arrays, we need to install two switches to connect. A more intuitive setup interface could enhance user experience as well.

I have been using Dell PowerEdge M with the first generation and series for about 12 to 13 years.

I rate the stability of the solution very highly, around nine out of ten.

Scalability is straightforward within the same generation or class, yet becomes difficult if the server exceeds three years in age due to software version compatibility issues.

Customer service and support in Tunisia are quite good, and I would rate them nine out of ten.

Positive

We have used other solutions. For example, Lenovo does not have strong support in Tunisia, whereas Health Packard Enterprise provides good technical support but is more expensive.

The initial setup is somewhat complex. A more intuitive and unified setup interface would significantly enhance the initial experience.

Pricing is relatively high. I would rate it as a six. It is somewhat expensive but manageable.

Besides Dell, Health Packard Enterprise and Lenovo are possible evaluations. They each have their own limitations.

Overall, I have a positive experience, and my customers have had good experiences as well. Some of my customers have been using Dell PowerEdge M solutions for fifteen years. 

I would rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

We used it for normal Windows servers before, in my previous client. They used it for regular Windows clients, and they have a significant infrastructure.

I have explored the new iDRAC features. It's similar to what we have in HP as well.

Using the iDRAC feature makes server management much easier for this type of setup. It's quite useful.

Perhaps the processor needs some improvement in terms of processing features. If I remember correctly, the Intel Xeon processor shipped with the Dell PowerEdge M is the 6426Y.

This processor is a 16-core processor that can handle around 32 threads. Now, the HP server we are considering has a 6430 processor, which is 32 cores. It can handle 64 threads. So it's twice as much as the Dell PowerEdge M. However, the memory module, the DDR4-4800, is the same.

But according to reviews and online sources, the memory performance is much better on the Dell PowerEdge. That's where the confusion arises.

Another area of improvement could be scalability. 

I have been working as a system admin for 15 years. So, we used Dell PowerEdge M in the past. 

We had Dell PowerEdge M ranging from the 2900 to the 2950 models. We have the 360 G5, G6, G7, and the 380 G7. And later on, we started virtualizing the environment.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

If we consider the end users, it would be more than 10,000. This setup is for the Ministry of Education, specifically for a college.

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. 

Our clients are planning to upgrade the system infrastructure with Cisco Blades. They want to move away from the complexity of managing other servers.

The initial setup is easy. 

In my current client's environment, but they are more inclined towards Cisco servers and have a large infrastructure based on Cisco blades. They have three different clusters with individual hosts, and they primarily use Hyper-V rather than VMware.

The processor performance is better on the HP, while Dell has an advantage in terms of memory performance. The client is having trouble deciding which one to go for.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. I have worked with the older servers. Even though they were quite old, they performed well because it has been a long time since we acquired Dell servers. I purchased Dell PowerEdge R730 or Dell PowerEdge R740. In general, the parts are reasonably priced compared to other products. They are easy to manage. And I strongly believe that the parts are of better quality.

The initial set up was fairly easy. It wasn't difficult compared to other packages. We did the initial set up for Synergy's fibre channel switches before we started but afterwards, we did not have to worry about using the virtualized fibre or anything with them, the storage automatically came with it.

Their features and product overall are comparable to others on the market, nothing stands out. The company should have either been more clear with the packaging, or a little bit more forthcoming with what you needed, what is in the package, and what came with it.

I have been using the solution for a couple of years.

The solution is pretty stable.

The solution integrated well. We were able to still use Synergy, which is our main platform, and usually, as long as you can still use your main platform for upgrades then it is easy to scale. However, if you were to start changing the main hardware out it then becomes more difficult to be able to scale.

The customer service was pretty good.

My career started with using HP servers. The problem aroused when the HP servers became very hot and resource-intensive. We then started using Cisco products, and they were about the same as HP with the issues we were having. Once we moved to Dell products, it all came together, we could use all three. All three had their own separate purpose.

The set up is complex. However, once everything is up and running, it was pretty straightforward. We had a vendor assisting with the initial set up but once we were through those initial problems, finding out the order of how it is supposed to be set up, and finding out the packages needed, you are good to go to use them.

We had to contact a vendor to give us some help with some of the areas of the install.

There are many packages available, it was a benefit using a vendor to help us get a package we needed. If we would not have gone with the vendor we might have been charged unnecessarily for packages we did not need. 

I would recommend using engineers to help make the design for the setup of the solution. This will allow for a clear view of what is needed for your environment, they can identify issues and know exactly what packages are needed before purchasing. 

I rate Dell PowerEdge M a seven out of ten.

I have been using Dell EMC for a number of use cases in my organization. We have made a cluster system and we have it for the LAN and SAN traffic that passes through it.

So far, I haven't applied the LAN traffic and commerce solutions, but I have planned to integrate the solutions. I have not deployed the SAN traffic. I have a one-month plan to deploy the SAN traffic to pass through the LAN switch. This model only has converged solutions. We can do the cluster system so we have converged solutions.

This is the latest generation for Dell EMC Blade System. It has better facilities. I have used the M1000 series and compared to before, the current version is better. 

I have compared Dell EMC to other solutions and have found it to be good. The SAN and LAN traffic, manageability, and upgradability are all good. 

In terms of improvement, it should also offer a hyper-converged option.

Stability is the same compared to the other systems. 

The scalability depends on your needs.

I work in the IT division. Thirty people work under this infrastructure. 

Two or three people are required for maintenance. 

We use all of the blade systems. There are 32 blades. All of the blades run and provide a service. On the other side, there are also 32 blades that are no occupied. We are enrolling the service over there. 

Technical support is really good. I needed to do an upgrade. The network engineer gave us the total possibility to upgrade. They're really good. 

The initial setup is not very complex compared to other models. Other models are more complex. It is better than other systems. We are still in the process of migrating. 

We are upgrading the legacy system to this system. This system is really good as far as the performance, compared to other legacy or older blade models. All of the blade traffic goes through this to a switch. 

For organizations that don't have a blade system, they should start with planning in terms of how to segregate their systems in terms of LAN and SAN systems.

My advice would be to consider that both SAN and LAN traffic are ensured to come together and not separate.

I would rate the Blade Servers a nine out of ten. 

Our primary use case for the solution is store virtualization, and it is deployed on-premises via blade servers.

The most valuable features of the solution are its price and performance.

The solution could be improved by continuously looking for ways to make it better.

We have been using the solution for about six years.

The solution is scalable, and approximately 200 employees utilize the solution.

We have had a great experience with customer service and support. I rate them ten out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. Two people are required for maintenance.

Purchasing the solution outright costs approximately 12,000.

I rate the solution a ten out of ten. However, the solution is good and can be improved by being proactive in making changes that could improve the solution.

We are using Dell PowerEdge M for application and database servers.

The solution is made with high-quality hardware.

I have been using Dell PowerEdge M for approximately seven years.

Dell PowerEdge M is stable.

The solution is scalable.

We have had some issues with the vendor's support that we have received. When you open up a support case with Dell they send a partner to assist you and in our experience, they are lacking knowledge about the solution. There are times when you need professional support from the vendor that knows the solution well. 

Here in my country, it has been a problem for Dell to keep offices here. This has been a problem for other vendors too, such as HP.

Dell PowerEdge M price is comparable to other solutions but cheaper than IBM. However, the IBM solution is a higher grade solution whereas Dell PowerEdge M is a medium-level solution.

I have evaluated HPE solutions.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Dell PowerEdge M an eight out of ten.