CX-Programmer vs GX Works3
Comprehensive comparison of two leading PLC programming platforms
CX-Programmer
Omron
Easy to learn and use
GX Works3
Mitsubishi Electric
User-friendly interface, easier learning curve
Head-to-Head Match
Both CX-Programmer and GX Works3 are excellent choices with different strengths. CX-Programmer excels in community support, while GX Works3 leads in community support. Your choice should depend on your specific requirements, budget, and target hardware platform.
Score Breakdown
| Category | CX-Programmer | GX Works3 |
|---|---|---|
| Overall | 77 | 81✓ |
| Pricing | 75 | 75 |
| Ease of Use | 80 | 80 |
| Features | 84 | 86✓ |
| Industry Adoption | 65 | 80✓ |
| Community Support | 91 | 91 |
| Career Value | 68 | 74✓ |
Real-World Scenario Recommendations
See how CX-Programmer and GX Works3 perform in specific industry scenarios to help guide your decision.
Small Machine Builder
OEM building compact machines with 50-200 I/O points, typically for niche markets or specialized applications
CX-Programmer
Solid choice for small OEMs, especially in Asia-Pacific or material handling sectors. CX-Programmer (part of CX-One suite) licensing is affordable ($1,000-$5,000), and Omron CP/CJ series controllers offer good performance at competitive prices. The learning curve is gentle (2-3 months), enabling fast productivity. Omron's strength in sensors, vision systems, and robotics means excellent integratio...
GX Works3
Sweet spot for small Asian and European OEMs. GX Works3 licensing ($1,000-$5,000) is affordable enough that you can license 2-3 seats without breaking the bank. Mitsubishi's iQ-R and FX5 series offer excellent performance at competitive prices. The learning curve is gentle (1-3 months) - your programmer can be productive quickly, accelerating time-to-market. The software runs smoothly on modest ha...
Key Considerations:
- •Per-machine software licensing cost vs expected production volume
- •Time-to-market pressure - can you afford 6+ month learning curves?
- •Target customer geography and brand preferences
- •Hardware cost optimization - some platforms offer cheaper controllers
Automotive Tier 1 Supplier
Tier 1 automotive supplier providing systems and components directly to OEM vehicle manufacturers (VW, BMW, GM, Ford, Toyota, etc.)
CX-Programmer
Limited use in automotive Tier 1 space, primarily for Asian automotive suppliers working with Japanese OEMs where Omron has relationships. CX-Programmer with CP/CJ series PLCs can be cost-effective for ancillary systems, but most automotive assembly lines use more established platforms. The newer Sysmac Studio has better automotive credibility. If working with Japanese automotive companies, verify...
GX Works3
Increasingly common for Asian automotive Tier 1 suppliers, particularly those serving Japanese, Korean, and Chinese OEMs (Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Hyundai, Geely, BYD). Mitsubishi Electric has strong presence in Asian automotive manufacturing, and many OEMs specify or prefer GX Works3. The licensing cost ($1,000-$5,000) is significantly lower than Siemens/Rockwell - attractive for cost-sensitive mar...
Key Considerations:
- •Customer-specified platforms are non-negotiable - verify before any engineering investment
- •Long-term parts availability (15-20 years) is critical for automotive
- •Safety certifications (SIL 2/SIL 3) must be well-established and accepted
- •Customer's plant maintenance teams must be trained on your platform
Process Industry (Chemical, Oil & Gas, Pharma)
Continuous process control in chemical plants, refineries, pharmaceutical manufacturing, and other process industries requiring high reliability and regulatory compliance
CX-Programmer
Minimal process industry adoption. Omron's market focus is discrete manufacturing and packaging, not process industries. While technically capable of process control, the ecosystem lacks integration with process field instrumentation, safety systems, and industry-specific certifications. Not recommended for chemical, oil and gas, or pharmaceutical applications. Potentially acceptable for food and ...
GX Works3
Limited adoption in Western process industries, but more common in Asian process plants. Mitsubishi has process automation solutions, but market penetration is lower than Siemens or Rockwell in critical process applications. The reliability and features are adequate, but the ecosystem of process field instruments, safety systems, and SCADA integrations is less developed. For non-critical process a...
Key Considerations:
- •Redundancy and high availability are mandatory for critical processes
- •Safety certifications (SIL 2/SIL 3) for emergency shutdown systems
- •Long-term vendor support (20-30 year plant lifecycles)
- •Integration with process instrumentation and field devices
💰Pricing Comparison
Both CX-Programmer and GX Works3 are in the same price range ($$). CX-Programmer pricing ranges from $1 000 to $5 000, while GX Works3 ranges from $1 000 to $5 000.
📚Learning Curve
Both CX-Programmer and GX Works3 have similar learning curves (rated 4/10). Expect 2-3 months to become proficient with either platform.
⚙️Features & Capabilities
CX-Programmer offers 11 key features including safety programming, motion control, robotics integration. GX Works3 provides 11 key features with safety programming, motion control, robotics integration. Both platforms offer a comprehensive feature set for industrial automation.
🏭Industry Adoption
GX Works3 has 65% market adoption compared to CX-Programmer's 50%. GX Works3 dominates in Asia-Pacific, North America, Europe, while CX-Programmer is strongest in Asia-Pacific, Europe, North America. GX Works3's higher adoption means more job opportunities and community resources.
🔌Hardware Compatibility
CX-Programmer is designed specifically for Omron hardware, while GX Works3 works with Mitsubishi Electric PLCs. Both are vendor-specific solutions optimized for their respective hardware ecosystems.
💼Career Prospects
Both CX-Programmer and GX Works3 offer similar career value with certification programs. Knowledge of either platform will open automation career opportunities.
CX-Programmer Overview
Key Strengths
- ✓Easy to learn and use
- ✓Affordable pricing
- ✓Good simulation capabilities
- ✓Strong in material handling and robotics
Limitations
- ✗Less common in North America than Siemens/Rockwell
- ✗Smaller community than major competitors
- ✗Fewer job postings in some regions
Best For
GX Works3 Overview
Key Strengths
- ✓User-friendly interface, easier learning curve
- ✓More affordable than competitors
- ✓Strong in Asia-Pacific market
- ✓Good simulation capabilities
Limitations
- ✗Less common in North America
- ✗Smaller community compared to Siemens/Rockwell
- ✗Limited third-party integration
Best For
Recommendations
For Beginners
Both are suitable
For Professionals
Both are suitable
Budget-Constrained
Both are suitable
Enterprise Use
GX Works3
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is better: CX-Programmer or GX Works3?
Both CX-Programmer and GX Works3 are excellent choices with different strengths. CX-Programmer excels in community support, while GX Works3 leads in community support. Your choice should depend on your specific requirements, budget, and target hardware platform.
What is the price difference between CX-Programmer and GX Works3?
Both CX-Programmer and GX Works3 are in the same price range ($$). CX-Programmer pricing ranges from $1 000 to $5 000, while GX Works3 ranges from $1 000 to $5 000.
Which is easier to learn: CX-Programmer or GX Works3?
Both CX-Programmer and GX Works3 have similar learning curves (rated 4/10). Expect 2-3 months to become proficient with either platform.
Which has better career prospects?
Both CX-Programmer and GX Works3 offer similar career value with certification programs. Knowledge of either platform will open automation career opportunities.