Software Alternatives & Startups

gping (CLI) VS Fping (open source)

Compare gping (CLI) VS Fping (open source) and see what are their differences

gping (CLI)

Ping, but with a graph. Contribute to orf/gping development by creating an account on GitHub.

Rating
0 reviews
Fping (open source)

fping is a program to send ICMP echo probes to network hosts, similar to ping, but much better performing when pinging multiple hosts.

Rating
0 reviews
Pricing
Open source

Which is more popular?

Monitoring Tools popularity
25% vs 75%
alternatives listed
31 vs 42

Base details

Website, pricing, platforms and company facts side by side.

gping (CLI)
F
Fping (open source)
Website github.com fping.org
Pricing —
Open source
Listed in

Features and specs

What each product offers, as listed by its team.

gping (CLI) 5 features
F
Fping (open source) 5 features
  • Visual real-time graphing
    gping provides a real-time, terminal-based graph of ping latency over time, making it easy to visually spot trends, spikes, and packet loss at a glance — something the standard ping command cannot do.
  • Multi-host comparison
    You can ping multiple hosts simultaneously and see their latency graphs side by side in the same terminal window, which is extremely useful for comparing network paths or diagnosing routing issues.
  • Cross-platform support
    gping is available on Linux, macOS, and Windows, and can be installed via popular package managers like Homebrew, Chocolatey, Scoop, and various Linux package managers, making it accessible on virtually any platform.
  • Simple and intuitive CLI
    The tool is very easy to use with minimal configuration required. Just run 'gping <host>' and you immediately get a useful visual output. The command-line flags are straightforward and well-documented.
  • Supports arbitrary command graphing
    Beyond just pinging hosts, gping can graph the execution time of arbitrary commands using the --cmd flag, making it a versatile tool for monitoring the performance of any repeatable command over time.

Possible disadvantages

  • Requires installation of additional binary
    Unlike the standard ping command which is pre-installed on virtually every operating system, gping must be separately downloaded and installed, which may not be feasible in locked-down or minimal server environments.
  • Limited data export and logging
    gping is primarily a visual tool and lacks robust options for exporting ping data to files or structured formats (like CSV or JSON) for later analysis, making it less suitable for long-term monitoring or automated reporting.
  • Terminal size dependency
    The quality and usefulness of the graph depends heavily on terminal window size. In small terminal windows, the graph can become compressed and hard to read, losing much of the visual advantage over standard ping.
  • No alerting or threshold features
    gping does not support configuring alerts or notifications when latency exceeds a certain threshold or packet loss occurs, limiting its usefulness as a proactive monitoring tool compared to dedicated network monitoring solutions.
  • Resource overhead compared to standard ping
    As a graphical TUI application, gping consumes more CPU and memory than the standard ping utility. While generally negligible on modern systems, this can matter on resource-constrained embedded devices or when running many instances.
  • Speed
    Fping is designed to send out multiple ICMP Echo Requests in parallel, allowing it to quickly scan large numbers of hosts compared to traditional ping commands.
  • Scripting Friendly
    Fping is suitable for use in shell scripts due to its output format, making it useful for automated network monitoring and management tasks.
  • IPv4 and IPv6 Support
    Fping supports both IPv4 and IPv6, providing flexibility for various network environments.
  • Customizable Options
    It offers a wide range of options for setting the number of pings, intervals, and timing, allowing users to tailor the tool to suit specific needs.
  • Resource Efficiency
    Fping consumes fewer system resources compared to some GUI-based network tools, making it ideal for running on servers and low-power devices.

Possible disadvantages

  • Command-Line Interface Only
    Fping does not have a graphical user interface, which may make it less accessible to users who are not familiar with command-line operations.
  • Advanced Configuration Complexity
    While it is highly configurable, the range of options and parameters can be overwhelming for new users who may not have a deep understanding of networking.
  • Limited To Echo Requests
    Fping is designed specifically for ICMP Echo Requests, limiting its usefulness for scenarios that require more in-depth network diagnostics.
  • Lack of Built-In Analysis
    Unlike some more comprehensive network monitoring tools, Fping does not include features for detailed analysis and visualization of network data.
  • Potential Security Restrictions
    Some networks may have security policies that restrict the use of ICMP packets, which could limit Fping's effectiveness or even prevent it from functioning.

Analysis

An editorial look at what each product does well and who it suits.

gping (CLI)
F
Fping (open source)

Overall verdict

  • gping is an excellent, lightweight open-source CLI tool that modernizes the classic ping command by adding a real-time graphical visualization of latency directly in your terminal, making it a favorite among developers and sysadmins.

Why this product is good

  • Displays ping latency as a live, scrolling graph right in the terminal for easy visual analysis
  • Supports pinging multiple hosts simultaneously and comparing their latency side by side
  • Cross-platform support for Linux, macOS, and Windows
  • Written in Rust, making it fast, efficient, and reliable
  • Free and open-source with an active community and simple installation via common package managers
  • Can execute commands and graph their execution time, not just network pings

Recommended for

  • Network engineers and system administrators troubleshooting connectivity or latency issues
  • Developers who want a quick visual sense of network performance
  • Users who need to compare latency across multiple hosts at once
  • Anyone comfortable working in the command line who wants a more informative alternative to traditional ping

No analysis of Fping (open source) yet.

Category popularity

How often each product is chosen within a category, 0–100% relative to the other.

Score bands 0–20 21–40 41–50 51–60 61–100
gping (CLI)
F
Fping (open source)
25% 25%
75% 75%
22% 22%
78% 78%
59% 59%
41% 41%
21% 21%
79% 79%

User comments

Share your experience with using gping (CLI) and Fping (open source). For example, how are they different and which one is better?

Log in or Post with

Alternatives to gping (CLI) and Fping (open source)

When comparing gping (CLI) and Fping (open source), you can also consider the following products.