GNS or PacketTracer

Hi Guys:

What is better for practice? GNS or Packet tracer. Now i working with GNS and VMWARE's apps for real environment. Thanks!

Find more posts tagged with

SAVE $250 on Your CISCO Boot Camp — Use Code "EXAM26"

Exclusively for TechExams members for Infosec Boot Camps starting before April 30, 2026

View CISCO Boot Camps

Comments

oli356

For routers GNS3 is better as it runs proper IOS images. Can't do any proper switching and configuring them in GNS3 though.

So I would just use GNS3 for routers and then use packet tracer when you want to play with some switches.

NetworkVeteran

jorglct wrote: »

What is better for practice?

As with most things, it depends. For the CCNA, either tool is sufficient, so I'd say whichever you find easier to obtain, easier to use, and more exciting. GNS3's ability to run the real IOS as opposed to a sim becomes more important at the intermediate and expert level.

Can't do any proper switching and configuring them in GNS3 though.

That isn't quite true. I was able to create the CCNP TShoot topology in GNS3--routers, switches, and all--to get the practice I needed to rock that exam. GNS3 does do switching. However, the ESM module GNS3 emulates lacks some features found on 2950s/3550s. I certainly wouldn't recommend GNS3 for the CCNP Switch exam!

oli356

I stand corrected then

NetworkVeteran

oli356 wrote: »

I stand corrected then

You did raise a very valid point.

GNS3 is weaker than Packet Tracer in the domain of switching.

NotHackingYou

I used packet tracer for the CCENT and CCNA and I liked it. I also had real gear but I think for routing and switching practice PT would have been enough.

SecurityThroughObscurity

If you want to practice switching I would recommend Cisco IOU.
PM for download link.

MosGuy

I'm not sure one is necessarily better than the other, they both have pros and cons. At the CCENT/CCNA level, packet tracer is enough to get certified. I've seen some CCNP labs in PT too. It has the benefit of being lighter on system resources & simulates switches a little better. On the downside it doesn't have 100% of the command/feature set. GNS3 has the pros of being an emulator and running IOS images. So you have all the commands at your disposal. On the downside it has limited switching. You do learn the older switch style using the ESM. GNS3 also likes as much CPU & RAM that you can give it.

Both do have their quirks, especially with cabling and interfaces. At times I've taken down a link yet they still show as active. If you can get past the bugs each program has, they still do a good job. I currently use both for studying for CCNA. When I get to CCNP, I plan on using GNS3 more. By using emulated routers linked to real switches to get the best of both.

Overall you can't go wrong with either application. A lot depends on your comfort level, as well as your system specs for running GNS3. I've found both quite useful

jorglct

Thanks for you information guys!!! I love GNS but consume a lot CPU resources! I begin work with PacketT.
Them, for CCNA Packettracer is enough?

SecurityThroughObscurity

It's totally enough.

cpartin

jorglct wrote: »

Thanks for you information guys!!! I love GNS but consume a lot CPU resources! I begin work with PacketT.
Them, for CCNA Packettracer is enough?

Common misconfiguration. Google "idlecpu gns3". Once you get this set correctly it takes minimal resources on any remotely modern CPU.

dpjackal89

I don't mean to steal the thread but since we are talking about GNS3 and Packet Tracer, anyone know of any sources for GNS3 or Packet Tracer? I have found a few labs but was wondering if there was more.