Side by side
PacketCheck vs Shadow
Both stand on network testing software. Which one you can start free with, which one lets you read the code, and what each costs once you pay.
Paid Windows
PacketCheck provides broad Ethernet/IP test configuration, measurements, impairment controls, and report output for Windows users. Its license pricing is not published, and some advanced accuracy or simulator scenarios have additional requirements.
Visit PacketCheck Free plan Linux
Shadow combines real application execution with a private, configurable simulated network. Its deterministic model and scale fit research and testing, but users must account for security limitations and incomplete system-call coverage.
Visit ShadowThe facts
| PacketCheck | Shadow | |
|---|---|---|
| Free plan | Not published | Yes |
| Open source | Not published | Not published |
| Runs on | Windows | Linux |
| Lowest paid plan | Free or on request | Not published |
| Plans published | 1 | None |
| Maker | Not published | Not published |
| Website | gl.com | shadow.github.io |
| On network testing software | #31 of 33 | #27 of 33 |
PacketCheck: what it does well
- Supports multiple protocol layers
- Traffic testing up to 500 Mbps
- PCAP and PCAPNG capture playback
- PDF and XML reporting
- Node-locked or floating licenses
What to know first
- Windows desktop only
- Pricing available on request
- Higher-rate accuracy recommends Intel Ethernet hardware
- Some GTP simulation integrations need extra licenses
Shadow: what it does well
- Runs unmodified Linux application binaries
- Deterministic simulations support bug reproduction
- Models latency and packet loss
- Can simulate thousands of processes
- 100% open-source software
What to know first
- Linux-only platform
- Not designed to isolate malicious programs
- Unsupported system calls may cause failures
- Building requires several Linux dependencies
Alternatives to PacketCheck Alternatives to Shadow The whole list