Nethogs vs Wireshark : Which is Better?

Nethogs icon

Nethogs

Nethogs is a bandwidth monitoring software. Developed by raboofje

License: Open Source

Categories: Network & Admin

Apps available for Linux Xfce

VS
VS
Wireshark icon

Wireshark

Wireshark is an open source network sniffing utility to analyze network traffic.

License: Open Source

Categories: Security & Privacy

Apps available for Mac OS X Windows Linux BSD

Nethogs VS Wireshark

Wireshark is a powerful network protocol analyzer that provides in-depth packet analysis, making it ideal for comprehensive troubleshooting and protocol dissection. In contrast, Nethogs is a lightweight tool focused on real-time monitoring of bandwidth usage per application, making it suitable for quick assessments and user-friendly for those needing basic monitoring.

Nethogs

Pros:

  • Lightweight and easy to use
  • Real-time monitoring of bandwidth usage per process
  • Displays network use by application
  • Simple command-line interface for quick access
  • No need for complex setup
  • Good for quick assessments of bandwidth
  • Works well for monitoring specific processes
  • Low resource consumption
  • Installed and run quickly
  • Ideal for users who need basic monitoring

Cons:

  • Limited features compared to Wireshark
  • Lacks advanced packet analysis capabilities
  • No GUI; command-line only
  • Not suitable for protocol dissection
  • Limited filtering options
  • Less detailed reporting than Wireshark
  • Only useful for monitoring applications, not entire network
  • Not as comprehensive for network troubleshooting
  • Can miss out on low-level packet details
  • May struggle with heavy traffic

Wireshark

Pros:

  • Comprehensive packet analysis
  • Supports a wide range of protocols
  • Powerful filtering and search capabilities
  • Detailed traffic visualization
  • Ability to capture live traffic from multiple interfaces
  • Extensive documentation and community support
  • Cross-platform compatibility
  • Advanced features for network troubleshooting
  • Ability to save and export capture files
  • Graphical user interface is intuitive for experienced users

Cons:

  • Can be overwhelming for beginners
  • Requires a learning curve to master advanced features
  • Resource-intensive on large captures
  • Not ideal for real-time monitoring
  • Can be complex to install on some systems
  • Requires administrative privileges for some features
  • Not as effective for live traffic analysis compared to Nethogs
  • Less focus on per-process monitoring
  • More suited for in-depth analysis than quick checks
  • Can generate large amounts of data

Compare Nethogs