PLCnext vs GX Works3
Comprehensive comparison of two leading PLC programming platforms
PLCnext
Phoenix Contact
FREE programming software
GX Works3
Mitsubishi Electric
User-friendly interface, easier learning curve
Overall Winner
GX Works3 leads with an overall score of 81/100
GX Works3 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 | PLCnext | GX Works3 |
|---|---|---|
| Overall | 64 | 81✓ |
| Pricing | 100✓ | 75 |
| Ease of Use | 40 | 80✓ |
| Features | 69 | 86✓ |
| Industry Adoption | 38 | 80✓ |
| Community Support | 94✓ | 91 |
| Career Value | 58 | 74✓ |
Real-World Scenario Recommendations
See how PLCnext 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
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...
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.)
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...
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-$5,000) is significantly lower than Siemens/Rockwell - attractive for cost-sensitive mar...
Key Considerations:
- •Customer-specified platforms are non-negotiable - verify before any engineering investment
- •Long-term parts availability (15-20 years) is critical for automotive
- •Safety certifications (SIL 2/SIL 3) must be well-established and accepted
- •Customer's plant maintenance teams must be trained on your platform
Process Industry (Chemical, Oil & Gas, Pharma)
Continuous process control in chemical plants, refineries, pharmaceutical manufacturing, and other process industries requiring high reliability and regulatory compliance
PLCnext
Too immature for critical process industries. Phoenix Contact's open architecture and IoT capabilities are interesting, but process industries require proven platforms with decades of regulatory acceptance. The limited process industry track record, lack of redundancy configurations, and minimal safety certifications eliminate PLCnext from consideration for refineries, chemical plants, or pharmace...
GX Works3
Limited adoption in Western process industries, but more common in Asian process plants. Mitsubishi has process automation solutions, but market penetration is lower than Siemens or Rockwell in critical process applications. The reliability and features are adequate, but the ecosystem of process field instruments, safety systems, and SCADA integrations is less developed. For non-critical process a...
Key Considerations:
- •Redundancy and high availability are mandatory for critical processes
- •Safety certifications (SIL 2/SIL 3) for emergency shutdown systems
- •Long-term vendor support (20-30 year plant lifecycles)
- •Integration with process instrumentation and field devices
💰Pricing Comparison
PLCnext ($) is significantly more affordable than GX Works3 ($$). PLCnext costs between $0 and $2,000, while GX Works3 ranges from $1,000 to $5,000.
📚Learning Curve
GX Works3 (rated 4/10) is easier to learn than PLCnext (rated 7/10). GX Works3 typically takes 1-3 months to learn, while PLCnext requires 4-8 months. This makes GX Works3 better for beginners.
⚙️Features & Capabilities
PLCnext offers 11 key features including motion control. 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 PLCnext's 25%. GX Works3 dominates in Asia-Pacific, North America, Europe, while PLCnext is strongest in Europe, North America, Asia-Pacific. GX Works3's higher adoption means more job opportunities and community resources.
🔌Hardware Compatibility
PLCnext is designed specifically for Phoenix Contact hardware, while GX Works3 works with Mitsubishi Electric PLCs. Both are vendor-specific solutions optimized for their respective hardware ecosystems.
💼Career Prospects
GX Works3 offers stronger career prospects with 65% market adoption and official certification programs. PLCnext has 25% adoption and is also backed by certifications. For maximum employability, GX Works3 expertise is more in-demand.
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
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
GX Works3
For Professionals
GX Works3
Budget-Constrained
PLCnext
Enterprise Use
GX Works3
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is better: PLCnext or GX Works3?
GX Works3 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 PLCnext and GX Works3?
PLCnext ($) is significantly more affordable than GX Works3 ($$). PLCnext costs between $0 and $2,000, while GX Works3 ranges from $1,000 to $5,000.
Which is easier to learn: PLCnext or GX Works3?
GX Works3 (rated 4/10) is easier to learn than PLCnext (rated 7/10). GX Works3 typically takes 1-3 months to learn, while PLCnext requires 4-8 months. This makes GX Works3 better for beginners.
Which has better career prospects?
GX Works3 offers stronger career prospects with 65% market adoption and official certification programs. PLCnext has 25% adoption and is also backed by certifications. For maximum employability, GX Works3 expertise is more in-demand.