I spent last weekend troubleshooting a 40-node topology that brought my laptop to its knees. Turns out, choosing between EVE-NG and GNS3 isn't just about features. It's about whether you want to spend your time building networks or babysitting infrastructure.
Both EVE-NG and GNS3 let you build virtual networks without touching physical hardware. They're how network engineers test configurations, break things safely, and prep for certifications. But while they solve similar problems, they approach the solution in fundamentally different ways.
Here's the gist: EVE-NG shines for team collaboration and enterprise testing through its browser-based approach, while GNS3 excels at solo prototyping with its flexible, workstation-friendly design. And increasingly, teams are skipping the DIY headaches entirely by using hosted versions through CloudMyLab.
Although CloudMyLab offers all the major emulation platforms and for the sake of transparency, CloudMyLab is an official EVE-NG Hosting Premium partner.
Let's dig into which one actually fits your workflow.
Table of contents
Here's how EVE-NG and GNS3 stack up for network emulation:
|
|
EVE-NG |
GNS3 |
|---|---|---|
|
Best for |
Multi-user teams, enterprise testing, training classes |
Solo engineers, quick prototyping, workstation builds |
|
Architecture |
⭐⭐⭐⭐ Centralized server with web UI |
⭐⭐⭐ Distributed (local GUI + optional server) |
|
Setup complexity |
⭐⭐⭐ Server appliance deployment |
⭐⭐⭐⭐ Quick local start, complex at scale |
|
Multi-user support |
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ Built-in roles, RBAC, AD/RADIUS (Pro) |
⭐⭐ Project sharing, no formal RBAC |
|
Performance at 20+ nodes |
⭐⭐⭐⭐ Predictable on proper hardware |
⭐⭐⭐ Can strain workstations quickly |
|
Automation readiness |
⭐⭐⭐⭐ Ansible, Python, Terraform friendly |
⭐⭐⭐⭐ Ansible, Python, Terraform friendly |
|
Project portability |
⭐⭐⭐ Export/import labs |
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ .gns3project bundles everything |
|
Free tier limitations |
⭐⭐ Heavy (63 nodes, 2 admins max) |
⭐⭐⭐⭐ Fully functional core |
|
Learning curve |
⭐⭐⭐ Moderate (server mindset needed) |
⭐⭐⭐⭐ Gentler for beginners |
|
Total cost at scale |
⭐⭐⭐ Pro license + infrastructure |
⭐⭐ Hidden hardware/time costs |
EVE-NG takes the server approach. You deploy it as a virtual appliance, and everyone accesses labs through their browser. No client software, no version mismatches, just a URL and credentials.
I've used EVE-NG Pro for enterprise testing scenarios where six engineers needed to touch the same 50-node topology. The browser-based approach just works. No "it runs on my machine" arguments, no juggling VPN configs for remote access. Everyone sees the same thing.
But here's what the marketing doesn't tell you: the Community edition is basically a demo. You're capped at 63 nodes per lab, two admin accounts, and limited concurrent users. For any serious work, certification prep with realistic topologies, team collaboration, enterprise testing, you need Pro.
The Pro version unlocks what you actually need:
Setup reality check: While EVE-NG runs as a server appliance, don't underestimate the initial setup. You'll need to size your hardware properly (think server-class CPUs, NVMe storage, and lots of RAM), configure networking, and potentially integrate with your auth systems. It's not rocket science, but it's not a five-minute install either.
The web interface itself deserves mention. it's clean and responsive. Drag-and-drop topology building feels natural, and the right-click context menus put everything where you'd expect. After a week, muscle memory kicks in and you're flying through lab creation.
GNS3 takes a different philosophy. It's a toolkit rather than a platform. You install the GUI locally, and it orchestrates device emulation either on your workstation or connected to remote compute resources (like the GNS3 VM).
This flexibility is GNS3's superpower for individual users. Need to quickly test a three-router OSPF setup? Spin it up locally. Want to integrate Wireshark captures or Docker containers? Drag and drop. Building a topology you'll reuse? Package it as a portable .gns3project file with all images included.
I started with GNS3 for Cisco CCNP studies, and the learning curve was gentle. Within an hour, I had routers talking to each other. Within a week, I was building complex service provider topologies. The community is massive, and nearly every problem you'll hit has been solved on the GNS3 subreddit.
But (and it's a big but), GNS3 shows its limitations as you scale:
The portable project advantage: One thing GNS3 absolutely nails is portability. The .gns3project format bundles your topology and all required images into a single file. This makes sharing labs or moving between machines dead simple, something EVE-NG makes you work harder for.
Want to share a lab with a colleague? Export to .gns3project, send the file, they import and run. No worrying about image versions, no missing dependencies. This alone makes GNS3 fantastic for creating training materials or troubleshooting scenarios you can hand off to others.
Let's talk about what happens when your labs grow beyond toy examples.
With EVE-NG on proper server hardware, performance is predictable. Run 50 CSR1000v routers? Sure, if you've got the RAM. The centralized architecture means you plan once, deploy once, and everyone gets consistent performance. Resource monitoring is straightforward since everything runs in one place.
GNS3's distributed model creates interesting challenges. Your topology might span your laptop (running the GUI), a local VM (running some devices), and a remote server (running heavier appliances). When something goes wrong (and it will) you're troubleshooting across multiple systems.
Here's my experience with a 30-node multivendor topology:
The sweet spot depends on your use case:
Real-world tip: If you're going DIY with either platform at scale, invest in server-class hardware upfront. Consumer gear will frustrate you endlessly. Think dual Xeon CPUs, 256GB+ RAM, and NVMe storage. Yes, it's expensive. No, you can't really cheap out here.
If you're working solo, skip this section. But if you need multiple people accessing labs, for training, team testing, or paired troubleshooting, the platform choice becomes obvious.
EVE-NG Pro was built for multi-user scenarios:
With GNS3, multi-user access means rolling your own solution. You might use screen sharing, take turns with VPN access, or build elaborate automation around project files. It works, but it's duct tape and prayers compared to EVE-NG's native capabilities.
Real scenario: I needed five junior engineers to practice the same BGP lab simultaneously for certification prep. With EVE-NG Pro, I created the template once, and each person got their own instance. Total setup time: 30 minutes. The GNS3 alternative would've involved five separate VMs, careful resource allocation, and probably a lot of "why isn't mine working?" troubleshooting.
But here's something interesting. For certain use cases, GNS3's lack of built-in multi-user features is actually a benefit. No user management means no user management overhead. Sometimes simple is better, especially for small teams that trust each other.
Everyone loves to talk about GNS3 being "free" and EVE-NG having a cost. Let me tell you what you're actually paying for.
GNS3's "free" reality:
EVE-NG's actual costs:
But here's what nobody talks about: the hidden cost of being your own platform engineer. Industry estimates suggest maintaining a DIY lab environment requires 1.5-2.0 FTE at enterprise scale.
Note: Pricing models change constantly. What I quoted last month might be different when you read this. EVE-NG has moved to different licensing tiers, and hardware costs fluctuate with the market. Always check current pricing before making decisions.
The TCO calculation gets even more complex when you factor in:
After watching teams struggle with DIY infrastructure, I've become a convert to hosted solutions for anything beyond personal learning.
CloudMyLab offers both EVE-NG and GNS3 as managed services. You pay monthly, they handle everything else:
The math works out surprisingly well. Check out our pricing for EVE-NG hosting
and the pricing for GNS3 hosting
with CloudMyLab hosted you get predictable monthly fee, no surprises, and you can start tomorrow.
I've migrated three different organizations from DIY to hosted labs. Every single one saw:
The migration is straightforward too. Export your EVE-NG labs or GNS3 projects, upload to the hosted environment, done. Your topologies run exactly the same, just faster and more reliably.
They’ve even seamlessly integrated CloudMyLab EVE-NG with their existing pipeline for automated test lab spin-up, configuration drift management, and test lab spin-down. It fully supports all their automation use cases and performs automated configuration validation in the EVE devices before pushing to production.
The intangible benefits: Beyond the hard numbers, hosted solutions provide peace of mind. When a critical customer demo is tomorrow and your lab environment crashes at 8 PM, having actual support to call changes everything. That's not something you can easily quantify, but anyone who's been there knows the value.
Both platforms have vibrant communities, but they're different beasts.
The GNS3 community is massive and incredibly helpful. The subreddit is active, the forums are full of solutions, and there's a YouTube video for nearly everything. It's very much a "help yourself and others will help you" vibe.
EVE-NG's community is smaller but more focused on enterprise use cases. You'll find fewer hobbyists and more people solving production problems. The official forums are decent, though response times vary.
For official support:
This matters more than you might think. When you're stuck at 2 AM trying to get a lab working for tomorrow's presentation, the quality of available help can make or break you.
Both platforms support extensive device libraries, but there are nuances:
EVE-NG device support:
GNS3 device support:
The real difference isn't what's supported, but how you get images working. GNS3's appliance template system makes importing new devices straightforward. EVE-NG requires more manual image preparation, but once configured, devices are rock-solid.
After years of using both platforms (and helping others choose), here's my honest take:
Choose EVE-NG if:
Choose GNS3 if:
Choose CloudMyLab hosted (either platform) if:
To learn more about CloudMyLab, contact us.
Bottom line: Both EVE-NG and GNS3 are excellent platforms that have enabled thousands of engineers to level up their skills. The "best" choice depends entirely on your constraints. Solo learning on a budget? GNS3 gets you started fastest. Team collaboration with enterprise needs? EVE-NG Pro is purpose-built for this. Need it to just work? Hosted solutions remove the infrastructure headache.
One final thought: your choice isn't permanent. I've seen plenty of engineers start with GNS3 locally, graduate to EVE-NG as their needs grow, and eventually move to hosted when they realize their time has better uses. The skills transfer, and most importantly, the networking knowledge you gain works everywhere.
Related reading:
Learning resources:
Both work great. For solo practice, GNS3's free tier gets you started immediately. For study groups or boot camps, EVE-NG's multi-user features shine. Honestly though? For cert prep, either platform hosted on CloudMyLab means you spend time learning networking instead of troubleshooting your lab environment.
EVE-NG Pro, hands down. The centralized architecture, role-based access, and authentication integration are built for enterprise workflows. GNS3 can do it, but you'll spend significant time building supporting infrastructure.
Absolutely. Both platforms play nicely with Ansible and standard automation tools. The difference is in execution stability and concurrent access when multiple automation runs happen simultaneously.
This is where the paths diverge. With GNS3, you'll add the GNS3 VM or build a dedicated server. With EVE-NG, you'll deploy the server appliance from the start. Or skip the headache entirely with a hosted solution that scales elastically.
DIY costs are dominated by hardware and the hidden cost of platform maintenance. Hosted options shift this to predictable monthly operational expense. For teams of 5+, hosted typically becomes cost-effective when you factor in the true cost of engineering time.