HPE Hyper Converged Reviews

We use HPE Hyper Converged for IT infrastructure. 

The solution needs to add a module or plugin of vCenter for clear monitoring and insights. 

I have been using the solution for five years. 

HPE Hyper Converged is stable. 

The solution is scalable. We have more than 1,200 users for the product. 

We get very good technical support for HPE Hyper Converged. 

The tool's installation takes three days to complete. We need two resources to handle the tool's deployment. 

We deployed the solution in-house. 

HPE Hyper Converged is an affordable solution. 

I rate the product an eight out of ten. 

If you were comparing this solution to VMware, it has more features, and it's very fast on the recovery.

One problem I've had is that I was trying to do a move and it was not working. I was given an error and a message asking me to shut down the machine first and then move it to another host. While in the normal VM, we just used the existing viable machine and moved it to another host without an issue.

As this product is new to me, I need to do a bit more training to see what it offers.

It is an expensive solution, however. If they could adjust the pricing, that would be helpful.

The stability is so nice. We like it.

The scalability is good. Right now we are deploying our production environment and our plan is to do the same in the DR environment also. We plan on increasing usage in the future.

Technical support has been fine so far. We have only been using the solution for the last two or three months, so it's hard to answer this question because we are new.

As far as I know, we did not do the installation, it was done with another company.

We were working with a vendor for HPE and they did all of the installations for us. 

The solution is easy to use and the data application and data recovery so far are better and faster than the competition. Many other features are really great.

I would rate it a seven out of 10. We like Hyper Converged HPE, but there's definitely a lot of unfamiliar features that I cannot comment much about until I've experienced them. 

Scaling and ease of management are good features. 

In my country, the biggest issue is probably pricing.

I have been working with HPE for the past ten years. 

In my experience, some business cases existed in the past. From my own country's perspective, currently, we haven't seen new customers adopting HPE HyperConverged, although existing users are still on board.

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten because sometimes it lags or crashes. 

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. It is a scalable solution. 

Customer service and support are working in the right way. 

The initial setup is easy. Features for maintenance patching, and updating are available. 

We only use it for on-premises virtualization infrastructure, not the cloud.

Most likely, it's a perpetual license.  

Our customers do not prefer subscription-based solutions, so we typically offer subscription-based support, but the license itself is perpetual.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. I would recommend using this solution. We are an HPE partner, so staying up-to-date with Spectrum and gaining relevant knowledge is crucial for our company's success. That's the main value for us.

The most valuable feature is the in-built backup system. The backup speed is also excellent.

The solution can be improved on the management side. More management features should be added to future releases.

The solution should have more in-depth manuals or user information. This would not only help us but also assist our customers.

The solution is very stable. We haven't had any complaints. It's a very effective solution.

Scaling the solution is simple. You simply need to add the resources, such as CPU or memory storage. It works like a cluster. If you have two nodes, then a third node can be added to the existing cluster.

We have not reached out to technical support as of yet, but so far, we haven't needed it.

Previously, we had what we called a traditional system, where you have a separate server, and storage, and a new backup system. All of this occupied almost three to four servers. This solution now covers all of our requirements in one. Our previous infrastructure was also almost all physical infrastructure. There was no virtualization. Now, we're almost 100% virtual in our infrastructure.

The initial setup is very simple. Any system engineer who has experience in VMware will find it very user-friendly. Deployment took about a week. Apart from the hardware, we had to install two types of hypervisors, and then we handled the virtual machines and the backup. For deployment, we had five engineers.

We handled the implementation ourselves.

For us, there are no extra costs above the standard licensing fees.

We are using the on-premises deployment model.

If you're looking for virtualization solutions, this is a very good product. If you're an organization that does not need virtualization or has some applications that cannot use it, you should look into other solutions, such as HP Synergy. That's an enterprise-level product, however. It's not suitable for SMBs.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

These days, most of our customers prefer Hyper Converged because of its performance and because it's an all-in-one solution. It's easier to manage. Our current client has 200 users.

Hyper Converge is easier to manage and performs better than traditional infrastructure.

We have faced some challenges when upgrading. With Hyper Converged, you have to fully upgrade because there are no incremental upgrades available in this solution. For example, let's say we have two nodes. If we want to upgrade storage, we also need to upgrade computing. That means a full upgrade EME. 

We have been using Hyper Converged for nearly four years.

Hyper Converged is highly stable because it's installed on our VMware platform. It's well designed and integrated with our Hypervisor software. 

Hyper Converged is scalable but there are some complications.  If we want to scale, we have to scale to the full capacity. We cannot go for granular upgrades. You can mention that we can upgrade, but for scalability, we need to add more notes. There is no granular options to upgrade the system.

I rate HPE Hyper Converged eight out of 10. I rate Hyper Converged eight because there are still some competing solutions doing better than HPE on Gartner's Magic Quadrant. 

HPE Hyper Converged handles all the network setup for my servers and data.

My experience is in SMBs.

Before we bought the HPE Hyper Converged servers, we had scattered systems and servers. Our data was scattered. When the solution came into place, we were able to connect all our data and organize it in one place. Now, our storage and IT are at an enterprise level with all the necessary controls and restrictions being enacted.

We will also be using the HPE Hyper Converged solution for simulations going forward once we install SAP.

The performance is robust for HPE Hyper Converged. We have been underutilizing the storage. Though, we have almost consumed 70 percent of the storage, and I can access my data whenever I want without searching all over the place for it.

In comparison, the VxRail is better in resource utilization and performance. It is also faster. It automatically will detect anything and configure anything. Learning VxRail is easier, as everything is native and linked together.

The storage efficiency is weak and needs to be improved. However, I do not think HPE is planning to improve it at this time. They will probably look to EOL it, because HPE SimpliVity has resolved this issue, but at a higher price tag.

To resolve this issue with HPE Hyper Converged, I will buy a backup appliance, then I will shift my data which I am not using often to a backup appliance. This will be offline data and solve my issues.

It is a stable solution because combined with VMware, which is always stable. It is very robust. 

HPE Hyper Converged supports up to 60 nodes. It is scalable, but we have to use the HPE OneView solution and have it to pass through vCenter. This consumes 10 cores of CPUs, which compromises performance.

Dell EMC VxRail supports up to 32 nodes, but is more futuristic and easier to scale. If you want to scale up, you just plug the nodes, then the cluster will detect the new node and configure it.

With Dell EMC, they own everything and create one solution altogether. They design it in the way where they know the weaknesses of every solution that they have. 

This is much better than HPE. For example, I remember during the last storage issue that I had. HPE technical guys weren't able to support it, so I had to go back to VMware. This creates a loop or weakness. 

When you buy from Dell EMC directly, you receive that one point of contact for service and support.

The implementation took almost two days for us, even though HPE told us that it would take two hours.

When comparing VxRail vs HPE Hyper Converged, VxRail is easier to implement. You just initiate the start, then it automatically starts the configuration. It detects the nodes and everything else. Everything which is connected to the data center is set up within two to three hours (maximum). While I haven't done the set up, I have seen it done.

Pricing with Dell EMC is double the price which I paid for HPE. However, in the end, Dell EMC is double in performance. This is not an apple to apple comparison though, as I have a four node from Dell EMC and a three node.

I don't feel VxRail is that expensive.

The competitors in the market are HPE SimpliVity, VxRail, and Nutanix. All these solutions are extremely pricey. 

I feel VxRail is one of the best solutions you might ever have because of the protection it offers. 

SimpliVity is good, and it's reliable. It supports one node.

HP 380 is not up to the level of VMware products. They have more features, such as duplication or compression. 

My entire environment is actualized in VMware.

Before choosing a product, think why you are buying, the reason, and what you are looking to get from it. If you have too much data or you want to store data, seeking a hyperconverged storage will be costly. It will not be efficient for you. You should look into alternative storage solutions and ways of implementation before buying a hyperconverged solution. Make sure you are actually need those features.

The future is in hyperconverged solutions. They are much easier to manage and run. They are flawless. You can just log into VMware and have everything in front of you. However, it's costly compared to a traditional setup. 

A company should look at the data protection features, because in the end, the most valuable asset in any organization is its data. It should be protected as much as possible. Consider the way it works, with its space saving and space efficiency. Those are the key factors you should look at before deciding on a solution.

I would rate HPE Hyper Converged as seven out of ten.

I would rate VxRail as a nine out of ten.

So far the solution has simplified the usage.

I've found the data protection features the most valuable.

The price can be improved. We would like to see support for some open source virtualization technology like for example KVM.

Stability is very good. 

In terms of scalability, a lot has been done so it's quite easy to add additional load. Since it is only a testing system, there is a relatively small number of people using the solution right now. Less than 10 people are using it.

In general, HP has good technical support. There are local teams here, and usually, the first level is done by contacting them. HP is not directly present. They changed their model, and a new company, that they selected, represents them here.

We did previously use another solution, but we felt it was time to try something else.

The setup was quite easy.

We implemented with the help of HP.

I would say that this solution is good depending on your needs and on budget. It's a good solution. Compared to the previous solution we used, it may not be vas good. But generally speaking, it's okay. I cannot say anything bad. It's only very small differences.

I would rate this solution eight out of 10. I would still like to see some other hypervisors available as an option to be used on the system - like KVM or Microsoft Hyper-V.

We primarily use the solution for internal applications.

Hyper-convergence is the most valuable aspect of the solution. We can avoid downtime when there's maintenance or updates needed. Also, we have homogenous hardware, so we have a lot of trust in the solution's reliability.

The pricing could be improved. It's quite an expensive solution.

The solution would be better served if it integrated with other solutions better.

The stability of the solution isn't bad. It's a good product.

The solution is scalable.

I would rate technical support seven out of ten. Sometimes we have had some delays in receiving parts or resolving issues. 

By the time I had started working with my employer, the solution was already set up, so I can't speak to how easy or difficult it was to implement.

Our technical team deployed the solution. It takes about four or five people to deploy and maintain it.

I use the on-premises deployment model.

HP has more experience making hyper-converge conversions, so they're easy to manage, and there are a lot of products that are compatible with it. Whether or not it would work for others depends on their environment. The solution would work best for businesses that are small to medium in size. I'm not sure how well it would work in a large environment.  

I would recommend the product to others. I would rate it eight out of ten.