HPE ProLiant DL Servers Reviews

The fact that they are consistent. I don't have to relearn for the 80 sites I support.

Stability and reliability. It's rare that it fails and, when it does, we have HPE support, with a four hour turnaround. It gets fixed.

I would like to see the simplicity of having the option of loading with something like SmartStart instead of having to make the external connection. There are issues with the startup that make it a little cumbersome. It takes us more time. Even though hardware and support might be rated higher, considering how much time we spend setting things up, that impacts us a lot. That's where the points get taken off my rating.

Scalability is about the number of drives and the number slots for memory and storage. We put in what we want. If it's not right, we put in more.

We have used technical support, and it can always be better. But everyone can. Sometimes I feel like I'm dealing with someone who is reading from a script, rather than with someone who understands the technology.

We knew we needed to invest in a new solution, because of lack of driver support. In the new Windows version, some drivers don't work with old MSAs and you have to get new ones. We used a previous generation of HPE servers before this.

When choosing a vendor, we look for support, reliability, durability, and not something that is end-of-life in a year.

I was involved in the installation. We ran it from the SmartStart CD to the online connection. (I don't know what they call it now.) It came with a supply kit and we could install it without an external connection. That's where we support it. In gaming, there is no connection to the outside world.

I would recommend HPE, but you have to be careful. Check if everything is compatible with what you currently have. You might upgrade part of a server, but not all of it. There can simply be incompatibility issues.

I like their scalability. The fact that where I have 24 drives in one of my servers, I can basically turn it into its own little storage tray if I want to, and then attach a server to it. It's really good for applications that you use really heavy disk IO.

For us, we use the DLs more on a piece by piece basis, so when our clients come to us with a very specific demand that really doesn't fit well with our blades, which is our preference, then we go to the DLs, and then we scale it out for whatever they need.

I'm not a fan of their rails. I hate how those things rack, as they're just not nice.

The server itself is quite good, easy to use. Configuration of it is a little bit tedious, you've got to be willing to spend a couple of hours just to get it set up before you can even start using it, because the reboots are ten - fifteen minutes long, and that'll kill you.

The cost per compute. I pay as much for a ProLiant DL as I do for a Blade. It requires more power, more cooling, more space for essentially the same function, if I wanted to, with the exception of additional storage. So for me it really does come down to cost.

We haven't looked at competitors in a very long time for those. We basically have stuck with HPE. It's a known name, so I don't want to give my customers something that might work, I want something that will work.

Get on it with OneView, because it's that single pane of glass, you can manage your blades, your DLs, and your 3PAR, all using that one tool.

I've been a ProLiant customer for years, since the late '90s. The ProLiant series has been very innovative over the years, compared to some of the competition that are not so innovative. It's very dependable, and they keep maturing the product more and more. Especially now, I'm looking at the Hyper Converged 380, so they're re-inventing new ways to use that technology. That's a great thing right there, with the Hyper Converged space as well. The management of them is valuable. I specifically don't use them on a daily basis, I have my engineers that do since they can easily manage the servers.

It's more of a rack server, it's more of a commodity kind of device. I know what I'm buying when I buy from HPE. I get that reliable server, good service, good support, and it works.

This server is separate from the next one and I'd like it to be integrated so it becomes all-in-one.

It's very stable.

Over the years that I've been involved with a lot of different server manufacturers as far as rack managed servers, Cisco C-Series, IBM X-Series, and a lot of HPE. They're comparable in many ways but we choose a lot of HPE because we know we're getting a good, reliable product and at a good price point.

It was very easy.

I had HPE do it.

Look at the Hyper Converged as everything's going to virtual, so look at the ProLiant in a Hyper Converged space.

For us, the iLO feature is essential because it provides us with server management capabilities and we have a distributed-base installation.

We're able to provide greater support services outside of normal business hours, as well as at sites where we don't have service groups.

The big challenge for us is our deliveries for certain countries, such as Australia and some areas of Asia.

We've deployed these servers without any issues.

I haven't noticed any increase or decrease in the performance and stability of the servers. I'd say it's very stable and we don't generally have any problems.

The range of available services from these servers is quite varies, so it's easy to find the right machine for the job. Whenever we've needed to scale, we're able to find the right model for us.

The technical support is very good, especially for onsite support for hardware problems. They're always reliable.

We previously used Dell, but we switched because of pricing and availability.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward.

We don't have an offsite team that helps, so we managed implementation internally with our own in-house team.

I'd recommend them, but make sure you've planned the right management options, power supplies, and other technical specifications. Make sure, also, that you get the extended warranty.

Reliability is a valuable feature for us. We use the DL380s throughout our data centers and they've proven to be very reliable.

We've been using them for several years, and because we've been using them throughout our data centers, they've been uniform. All of our techs are familiar with them, and I think it's just familiarity with the servers which has benefited us a lot.

We're going to the hyper converged area. I've seen OneView. I'm very pleased with how that interface looks. We saw SimplyView in a demonstration and Synergy. So until I get my hands on it, I don't know that I can say I'm looking for more improvements.

We've been using them for several years.

We are very impressed with the stability. The only time they've really failed on us is when the cooling in the area failed one time. Literally, the temperatures got so hot that they physically melted. That's probably the only time they failed.

Right now, we're looking into some of the newer hybrid architectures, hyper converged. So we're looking at keeping our older servers but trying to scale them out. So that's what we're looking at now.

The technical support has been very valuable. We had a storage array go bad, and they worked with us to get that storage array up and running again. So, yes, very valuable.

Prior to what we were using, I think we were just using all of the firmware-based solutions for setting up our arrays.

If you use a different supplier or a different company for your firmware or your hardware, then it has a different interface. It was just complicated. If you're using HPE for everything, it just made it so much simpler.

I was not involved in the initial setup, although my predecessor was. I've stood up servers and storage arrays from scratch, and I think it's not that complex. I think the user interface that HPE provides is straightforward. It takes away the complexity. That's my feeling, anyway.

We've looked at moving away from HPE in the past, and we were lured away. But HPE, for the requirements of our customers, for our own requirements, especially security, was key.

I think security is one of the first things we look at, and HPE has that covered.

We evaluated Dell. We chose to stay with HPE but we almost switched to Dell.

I mean, look at what other solutions are out there, and look up what your requirements are. For us, it's met all of our requirements. I don't think that the others could do that.

The most valuable features are reliability, the ease of implementation and setup. It's all wizard-driven. Also, maintenance on the devices, spare parts availability, and, as I’ve mentioned, reliability.

We've reduced the number of physical servers, currently. So, we've brought it down from 38 servers down to about 15. Seeing that we are standardizing, it's easier to support the devices, as we don't have that many different devices on-site that need to be supported.

I looked at the technologies offered at a recent HPE conference. There are a lot of technologies that are only offered on the high-end servers. As an example, the SSD module that's embedded on the memory; that's only available on the HP DL380. We've invested quite heavily in the HP DL360 G9s, which means that I won't have access to that technology. I would like it if there's a possibility, even if you have to pay an additional license, to enable that technology on the DL360s.

There's never a problem with it. It's always running. The reliability factor's quite high.

It has definitely been stable.

On the 3PAR, you just add devices as needed.

My previous employer, we were an HP house. Then when I started at the new company, I’ve noticed that they’ve got a mixed breed of technologies. It's not all industry or first-year suppliers or brands. I started the standardization strategy and obviously, HPE was the first choice.

The most important criteria when selecting HP were performance and reliability. I've got an existing relationship with a current supplier and, like I've mentioned before, I'm familiar with the brand and the technologies.

Initial setup was straightforward.

Before choosing this product, I also evaluated Dell and IBM rack servers.

Absolutely HPE. Absolutely happy with it.

There are several valuable features of these servers, including their reliability, the general standardization of components, expandability, price, and support. I think they're miles ahead of the competition in these areas.

I think that the main area of improvement would be in the price. The price only came down for us when we went to a dual vendor solution. We resorted to negotiating prices between HP and its competitors, and would have been nice to not have gone through that trouble to get a more competitive price.

We experienced no issues with the deployments.

The stability is great. They're always bugs with IT and the computers are there to test those. I wouldn't have a job otherwise. I'd say HP servers are generally more stable than the competitors.

They're very scalable.

We do most technical support in-house. If we do go to HP, the level of tech support will depend on the type of bug, who you're speaking to, how good the answer is, and how good the result is. Often you have to skip three layers of support before you can even get any assistance.

We have a multi-vendor network, but 99% of our kit is HP. We also use Dell and IBM equipment, but we chose HP for servers because it's just easier to support the platform. Multiple vendors need multiple hardware, and for multiple hardware, there are more update methods. They don't all work the same way and they're not all as reliable.

• Scalability
• Performance
• Out-of-band management
• Support

Java version dependence for its out-of-band management. This is also an issue for other vendors, as well.

HP Proliant Servers have been used on this project for over six years. I’ve managed them since I came on the project, so for almost five years. We used the BladeSystem alongside the DL servers.

There won't be any issues as long as you have followed the guidelines to ensure that the firmware was up to date prior to deployment.

There was an issue before I came on the project, where a firmware update was not applied, and that had caused a few systems to become unstable under certain conditions, but HP support was able to identify the cause and provide a solution.

The systems scale well for our environment.

Mostly very positive. The only issue I’ve encountered has been with presales support (i.e. getting accurate quotes to purchase systems).

Excellent.

Before coming on this project, I had used Dell servers. The performance of the HP server has an edge over the Dell systems I had used.

Overall the HP Proliant servers have been dependable and fit nicely into the price vs performance that is required for custom application stack.

HP Proliant servers are rock solid and when you need technical support HP’s team is there to support you with answers, no matter how long it takes to properly identify the root cause and then propose a solution.