HPE ProLiant DL Servers Reviews

We've used HP servers for a while now, and the most valuable features of them all, the DL series included, are the price and the quality. HP provides the best quality for the price.

We were using Dell before and we switched because HP has a range of products that, from our point of view, is exactly what we need. It supports a special power converter that's essential to us that Dell just doesn't have. We don’t need to do a lot of maintenance on the servers, so we need less people needed to manage them. HP provides us with great service as well, which helps us save on costs and other resources.

Although I compare them often to the Dell servers we used to have, these HP servers could be improved with faster memory. They perform well enough, but I might pay more for faster performance.

We've had no problems deploying these servers.

The stability is very good, 8/10.

Scalability is also very good, 8/10.

Technical service is outstanding, 9/10.

The initial setup was very easy and straightforward.

We evaluated Dell and Lenovo.

The most valuable features for us are the stability and scalability of these servers. However, what's truly key is the support we get.

They're very slow to boot up. And we can have issues with the driver sets for all operating systems as well. The blade enclosures themselves, though, are leading-edge technology.

I think the problem is that we're not geared up for automating the build process. We're still manually deploying servers.

We're still using the Gen 8 blades, though we've bought many of the new ones and we're going to install them soon.

We've had quite a few issues doing the initial builds and getting the operating system up and running.

It is very stable. HP products generally are.

It's scalable because you're not using actual discs within storage. You scale by adding additional services. The new Synergy product is going to be much better.

This is the key for us. The support from OCSL is excellent. We don't use them often.

They take a long time to set up and they're quite complicated to build as well.

We're pretty much an HP shop.

• Different form factors
• Small footprint
• Good compromise between pricing schema and available options
• Support and care packs add-ons

The product fits well between tight budgets and horizontal expansions.

More options beyond the ROM configurations for High Power computing and ULV (Ultra Low Voltage) deployments.

I've used the ProLiant servers since 2005.

The G6 was not a stable product.

If you had a Care Pack in place, the support was 9/10. In case you were left with no Care Pack, the best-effort option was worth nothing.

Many times the setup had to be agreed and consulted with HP representatives and technical after-sales staff.

Implementation was done in-house although physical installation was done through the vendor, as it was included in the price. When HP sent their consultants or staff to do the job, things moved faster. You should invest in your partners’ professional education MORE.

We consider ROI on not more than 24 months for our business cases, and hardware turnover on a three years basis. HP pricing and licensing schemas fitted well into our agendas.

Yes, we looked at equivalent products from SUN/Oracle and IBM. We chose HP for specific deployments and pricing comparison.

We still use this solution, but we're actually using an older version. Within our organization, there are roughly 10 users, using this solution.

Although we are happy with HPE ProLiant DL Servers, we are looking to replace them shortly.

HPE ProLiant DL Servers are a great product. We don't have many complaints.

I honestly can't think of any areas for improvement.

We've been using this solution for roughly 10 years.

The technical support is great. I have no complaints about them.

I used to use another solution, but that was over 10 years ago, so it's not relevant.

The initial setup is very straightforward. We installed it within half an hour.

We had some help with the implementation.

The price is a little too high; it could be reduced.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

With x86 hardware, a lot of it is the same. The value goes back to HP's willingness to partner and HP having a roadmap for the x86 platform.

No issues with stability or other major issues.

No issues with stability or other major issues.

HP is a market leader for scalability and additions.

Support has been helpful. Both customer and technical support have been very responsive to help make things right.

It was a market shift into x86 hardware and more commodity-based hardware.

Initial setup was straightforward.

• IBM
• Lenovo
• Dell

We chose HP because they had the right combination of factors and willingness to partner.

Reliability, support, and performance. A roadmap for where they are going in the future is important. We have that with HP.

The product can be used as a host.

The solution has very good performance and has been reliable.

We found that the extensions could be improved and the price could be a little lower.

I have been using this solution for two years.

It is a stable product.

The product has good potential for increased scalability. Currently, we have implemented the product for approximately 400 employees.

The support we experienced was good.

The setup was easy and not complicated.

Since the solution was not difficult to install, we were able to handle the full deployment ourselves with one technician.

The price of the product is a little high.

There are two sets of servers that we use. We have several sites where we have VMware clusters using the servers, and also we have standalone servers that we use for physical security applications.

They are both performing very well.

We are on a journey with that. iLO, in particular, helps us manage the servers better, especially as a lot of them are remote from where the IT staff are. We have some locations where we just have not got IT presence at those locations, so iLO really helps with that. We are starting to use HPE OneView to manage them further, so that is where we are going with it. Hopefully, to go and be able to manage them.

1. Obviously, they perform what we want them to do.
2. The added extras, I particularly like iLO.
3. Just to be able to manage them and get information about the servers. That is really good.

At the moment, I feel that there is more there that we could be using rather than things that are missing.

The servers are very stable. They have been in place for about six to seven years. We are refreshing stuff. We are about to refresh a lot of the vSphere servers because they have come to their end of life. They are about five years old, so we are gonna put in some hyper-converged servers instead. 

In theory, they are expandable. So yeah, they fit our needs and I am sure if things changed, when we needed more capacity, we could get it. I am confident of that. 

Technical support is very good. I can't complain. We have had very few incidents, but when we have needed to, we can get through to them and get the right support.

I was not involved in the initial setup. Though, we are going through a new setup and I will be involved in that.

With the DL380, you can't go wrong. There is no risk to go and take them.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: Trusting that you will always have the right level of service. Support is key for that, and obviously knowing that the servers are used by thousands and thousands of other people. That they will be tried and tested. It is reassuring.

It's easy to set up for the whole firm. Nobody has trouble with it.

• Easy to configure
• Reliable

It's perfect. It could go faster all the time, but the next generation is always faster.

Consistently stable. It is 99.9999.

We only use it on single machines, and for VMware we use another product from Cisco.

I am not responsible for the tech cases, so I can't comment.

It's straightforward. We use Red Hat, it's straightforward. We go from five to six or seven. It's no problem.

When our company looks to work with vendors, we look for

• first the price
• then the support 
• then the ease of use.