CX-Programmer vs PLCnext
Comprehensive comparison of two leading PLC programming platforms
CX-Programmer
Omron
Easy to learn and use
PLCnext
Phoenix Contact
FREE programming software
Overall Winner
CX-Programmer leads with an overall score of 77/100
CX-Programmer is the stronger overall choice with better community support. However, PLCnext may be preferable if you prioritize pricing or if you're already committed to the Phoenix Contact ecosystem.
Score Breakdown
| Category | CX-Programmer | PLCnext |
|---|---|---|
| Overall | 77✓ | 64 |
| Pricing | 75 | 100✓ |
| Ease of Use | 80✓ | 40 |
| Features | 84✓ | 69 |
| Industry Adoption | 65✓ | 38 |
| Community Support | 91 | 94✓ |
| Career Value | 68✓ | 58 |
Real-World Scenario Recommendations
See how CX-Programmer and PLCnext 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...
PLCnext
Forward-thinking choice for innovative small OEMs, especially those targeting Industry 4.0-focused customers. The software is FREE - you only pay for controller hardware. Phoenix Contact's open architecture philosophy means you can program in IEC 61131-3, C++, C#, or Python on the same controller. This flexibility is unprecedented. The Docker container support lets you run custom applications (dat...
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...
PLCnext
Interesting but risky for automotive Tier 1 suppliers. Phoenix Contact's open architecture and free engineering software are attractive, especially for cost-conscious EV startups. The IoT and Industry 4.0 capabilities align with automotive digital transformation initiatives. The Docker container support enables innovative edge computing applications (predictive maintenance, quality analytics). How...
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 ...
PLCnext
Too immature for critical process industries. Phoenix Contact's open architecture and IoT capabilities are interesting, but process industries require proven platforms with decades of regulatory acceptance. The limited process industry track record, lack of redundancy configurations, and minimal safety certifications eliminate PLCnext from consideration for refineries, chemical plants, or pharmace...
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
PLCnext ($) is significantly more affordable than CX-Programmer ($$). PLCnext costs between $0 and $2 000, while CX-Programmer ranges from $1 000 to $5 000.
📚Learning Curve
CX-Programmer (rated 4/10) is easier to learn than PLCnext (rated 7/10). CX-Programmer typically takes 2-3 months to learn, while PLCnext requires 4-8 months. This makes CX-Programmer better for beginners.
⚙️Features & Capabilities
CX-Programmer offers 11 key features including safety programming, motion control, robotics integration. PLCnext provides 11 key features with motion control. Both platforms offer a comprehensive feature set for industrial automation.
🏭Industry Adoption
CX-Programmer has 50% market adoption compared to PLCnext's 25%. CX-Programmer dominates in Asia-Pacific, Europe, North America, while PLCnext is strongest in Europe, North America, Asia-Pacific. CX-Programmer's higher adoption means more job opportunities and community resources.
🔌Hardware Compatibility
CX-Programmer is designed specifically for Omron hardware, while PLCnext works with Phoenix Contact PLCs. Both are vendor-specific solutions optimized for their respective hardware ecosystems.
💼Career Prospects
Both CX-Programmer and PLCnext 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
PLCnext Overview
Key Strengths
- ✓FREE programming software
- ✓Open, modern architecture
- ✓Multiple programming language support
- ✓IoT and Industry 4.0 ready
Limitations
- ✗Relatively new platform (limited adoption)
- ✗Small user community
- ✗Fewer job postings
Best For
Recommendations
For Beginners
CX-Programmer
For Professionals
CX-Programmer
Budget-Constrained
PLCnext
Enterprise Use
CX-Programmer
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is better: CX-Programmer or PLCnext?
CX-Programmer is the stronger overall choice with better community support. However, PLCnext may be preferable if you prioritize pricing or if you're already committed to the Phoenix Contact ecosystem.
What is the price difference between CX-Programmer and PLCnext?
PLCnext ($) is significantly more affordable than CX-Programmer ($$). PLCnext costs between $0 and $2 000, while CX-Programmer ranges from $1 000 to $5 000.
Which is easier to learn: CX-Programmer or PLCnext?
CX-Programmer (rated 4/10) is easier to learn than PLCnext (rated 7/10). CX-Programmer typically takes 2-3 months to learn, while PLCnext requires 4-8 months. This makes CX-Programmer better for beginners.
Which has better career prospects?
Both CX-Programmer and PLCnext offer similar career value with certification programs. Knowledge of either platform will open automation career opportunities.