Queries the following Comparison is trying to Answer:
- IBM Blades ( HS21 & LS21 & LS41 & HS21xm ) VS HP Blades ( BL460c & BL465c & BL480c BL680c& BL685c )
- IBM Blades H Chassis VS HP C-Class Blades Chassis
- How does HP Blades compare to IBM Blades?
- Advantages & Disadvantages of HP & IBM Chassis & Blades
- What is better HP Blades or IBM Blades? How?
- Independent Unbiased Comparison IBM Blades & HP Blades
- IBM Blade Server vs HP Blade Server
- IBM BladeCenter vs HP BladeSystem
| IBM Blades VS HP Blades | ||
| Chassis flexibility | BladeCenter S, BladeCenter E, BladeCenter H, BladeCenter T, BladeCenter HT, Common set of blades, switches, I/O fabrics and management infrastructure | BladeSystem c-Class, BladeSystem p-Class, bh 5700 ATCA |
| ITComparison Team Comments | IBM has several chassis sizes with different specs and sizes to meet the special requirement of every organization and options which can be interoperated between different chassis, where HP is only offer the c-class chassis and their older p-class chassis without any interopobility between them at all. | |
| Blade server flexibility | Intel® Xeon®, AMD Opteron, IBM POWER™, Cell BE™ | Intel Xeon, AMD Opteron, Intel Itanium® |
| ITComparison Team Comments | IBM are offering more blades platforms than HP specially with them including Power and Cell BE blades while HP are not offering any equivalent to these platforms, which can be a great advantage to customers who care to run operating system and applications which best supported on these platforms (Ex: AIX and Linux for power). | |
| Blades/Chassis Redundant Blades /Chassis Fully Redundant Blades/Chassis Blades w/ hotswap HDD per chassis Fully Redundant Blades w/ hotswap HDD | 14 14 14 14 14 | 16 8 0 16 0 |
| ITComparison Team Comments | It seems HP has succeeded to fit more blades per single chassis 16 blade vs 14 for IBM. As well HP can fit 16 blades with hotswap HDD where IBM can fit up to 14 of them (Please note as IBM had released HS22 they need no more to add an expansion unit to add hotswap HDD, so now they can fit 14 blades with hotswap HDD in their Chassis), but when it come to redundancy IBM has a long wining of the race. IBM chassis can fit 14 redundant blades where HP only can fit 8 semi-redundant blades in their chassis. We called HP semi-redundant blades as they are not fully redundant as explained under the redundancy comparison. | |
| Redundancy | – Dual power connections to each blade – Dual I/O connections to each blade- Dual paths through the backplane to I/O, power and KVM | – Single power connections to each blade- Single I/O connections on BL460c and BL465c blades- Single I/O paths for mezzanine slots 2 and 3 on the BL480c and BL685c |
| ITComparison Team Comments | It seems IBM is a clear winner on blades redundancy at the moment. This can be a major decision factor for large enterprises, as it can be a major availability factor. | |
| Hot Swap HDD Solid State Drives (SSD) | Require Expansion unit which waste 1U and reduce the number of blades per chassisAvailable | No need for expansion unit which save spaceNot Available |
| ITComparison Team Comments | It seems HP are having an advantage in being able to fit larger number of blades which includes HotSwap HDD into their C-class chassis, but IBM has a valid argument as most blades customers depend on boot from SAN which provide them with stateless blades and all kind of advantages including the ability of taking snap shots of their blades. In addition, with IBM introducing Solid State Drives it has even reduced the need for hotswap harddisks even further as these have no spinner and their reliability are way better than SCSI HDD. It seems HP still not offering Solid State Driver at the moment, but might be in the future.It seems a decision of more blades with hotswap HDD per chassis versus a real redundancy is the greatest comparing factors between HP and IBM blades. HP can fit more blades with hotswap HDD where only IBM can offer a fully redundant blade and Chassis. | |
| Illuminated path to blade components | Light Path Diagnostics uses battery to help diagnose even without power to the blade. | HP offer diagnostics LEDs beside some components, but will not led without power. |
| ITComparison Team Comments | Better and faster serviceability in the IBM Blades with the ability to pinpoint the problem even if the blades is not powering up, which is not offered by HP. | |
| Event identification | First Failure Data Capture | Nothing Equivalent |
| ITComparison Team Comments | IBM Blades got a better non over-lapping error reporting through their Management Module which help in resolving cascaded problems faster. | |
| Integrated 4X InfiniBand® switch modules | Two ports/card, managed | Two ports/card unmanaged |
| ITComparison Team Comments | IBM offer easier deployment and management of their InfiniBand switches as they are managed through the management modules where the ones offered by HP are unmanaged. | |
| Blade deployment and redeployment | Open Fabric Manager, Uses standard switches, single login across 100 chassis | Virtual Connect, Uses proprietary switches, single login across four chassis |
| ITComparison Team Comments | IBM Open Fabric ManagerFeatureHP Virtual ConnectAll Ethernet and Fibre Channel switches—Cisco, Nortel, Brocade, QLogicSwitch supportSingle proprietary HP Ethernet switch, Single proprietary HP Fibre Channel switchAutomated and integrated with resource poolingFailover supportRequires manual interventionVirtually all BladeCenter chassis, bladesCompatibilitySingle c-Class chassis supportSingle login via Advanced Management Module across 100 chassisInterface and capacitySeparate login to Virtual Connect Manager across four chassis | |
| Built-in Management Module | Yes | No |
| ITComparison Team Comments | IBM offer a hardware management module which fit in a special management slots of the IBM Chassis. It does not use up any Blades slots and does not require any software installation.HP does not offer a hardware MM, but provide a management software that will require you to install it on a blade or two if redundancy required. It can be installed as well on independent servers. Its disadvantage for HP as it will use up blades slots and require the customers to do installation. | |
| Efficient utilization of available power resources | PowerExecutive™ | Power Regulator, a bit Less functionality and over $400 charge |
| ITComparison Team Comments | HP and IBM power management software are offering almost the same functionality with IBM leading with few enhancements. In addition, IBM is providing their PowerExecutive as freebie where HP is charging for it. As far power consumption go it seems both vendor are doing almost as good and the difference in consumption depend on the configuration ordered by the customer. Most of our testing resulted with power difference less than 5% of the two with IBM consuming a bit less in most scenarios. | |
| Investment Protection | Across Chassis compatibility | Each chassis is a fully different game |
| ITComparison Team Comments | IBM has been successful in making their chassis totally backward compatible with their older modules and blades and most of their newer modules and blades fit in their older chassis with performance restrictions in rare cases, but that offer a great investment protection to customers who is upgrading their chassis comparing to HP which forcing their customers to toss their old blades and modules out as none of it is compatible across chassis. Who knows if the next HP chassis will follow up the same path as their current one, which mean a total lost of investment when upgrading. | |
Other Related Comparisons:
- IBM Blade Server vs Dell Blade Server
- IBM Blade Server vs SUN Blade Server
- HP Blade Server vs Dell Blade Server
- HP Bade Server vs SUN Blade Server
- Dell Blade Server vs SUN Blade Server
Please share your opinion with us. Feel free to point out any mistake or point you disagree with & make sure you point out why you disagree or prove why its wrong for us to investigate it. Please leave a comment with any new update that affect our comparison.
Enjoy & Share the Knowledge,
5 responses to “HP Blade Server VS IBM Blade Server”
I was reviewing your comparison and noticed that you said IBM Blades are limited to 7 blades with hot swap drives. I believe that has changed with the HS22 blades. Those have hot swap drives which would bring the blade total up to 14 blades per chassis with HS HDD’s
Hi Michael,
Please note all of the IBM Blades comparisons have been updated. It took us time to update them as we have been working on moving them to our new template.
Enjoy,
ITComparison Team
Will you be comparing “HP Virtual Connect Ethernet Flex-10” switches vs. “IBM BNT Virtual Fabric Ethernet” switches anytime soon?
Also, you do get SSD drives in the HP BL49x series.
Thanks for a very good independant comparison site!
-Jarle-
HI I would like to get some information regarding comparision between Fujitsu Balde and Dell Blade with vmWareon it… Can u Help?
Great job. Give us more. Every visitor will benefit from the published addition.