7 Finest PCB Design Software program I Suggest

My high 7 finest PCB design software program suggestions for 2025

What I search for in PCB design software program

The checklist beneath incorporates real person evaluations from our greatest PCB design software program class web page. To qualify for inclusion within the class, a product should:

• Modify PCB layouts and PCB circuitry
• Embrace a parts library so customers can simply implement high-quality PCB footprints
• Present schematic enhancing instruments for modification {of electrical} properties and different attributes of parts, wires, nets, and pins.

This knowledge has been pulled from G2 in 2025. Some evaluations have been edited for readability.

Altium Designer affords a unified platform that integrates totally different design instruments, together with schematic seize, format routing, documentation, and simulation, into one atmosphere. What I respect most is the flexibility to seamlessly transfer between these phases. For instance, as soon as I create the schematic diagram, I can simply transition to the layout-routing section, adjusting the design whereas visualizing the ultimate product. This easy workflow saves me time and helps me maintain every part organized with no need to change between a number of instruments or fear about integration points.

A function that basically impressed me is design for manufacturing (DFM). This ensures that designs should not solely practical but in addition simple to supply. The DFM instruments assist establish potential points early within the course of, lowering errors and saving time in the course of the manufacturing section. It’s reassuring to know that my design is optimized for manufacturing earlier than shifting on to precise fabrication.

With the 3D flex-rigid design, I used to be in a position to visualize how the totally different layers of a PCB interacted, together with each versatile and inflexible elements. This was particularly helpful when testing extra complicated, multi-layered designs. I can see how seeing how every part interacts in 3D can provide producers higher perception and assist them make extra knowledgeable selections whereas routing the format.

Its in depth part library affords an enormous collection of elements, parts, and templates, which allowed me to shortly discover what I wanted. This function reduces the necessity to manually design parts from scratch, and I used to be ready to make use of pre-validated elements that helped reduce errors. The wide array made the method quicker and extra dependable, which is all the time a plus.

The largest difficulty I confronted was the system necessities. Altium Designer requires a number of reminiscence and processing energy. On high-end machines, the software program runs easily, however on much less highly effective computer systems, I skilled noticeable slowdowns, particularly when coping with bigger, extra complicated initiatives.

Making an attempt to run a number of instruments directly typically resulted in lag, which made the expertise irritating. For customers with much less highly effective techniques, this might actually impression workflow and productiveness.

One other ache level for me was including footprints to units. Whereas Altium affords a big collection of footprints, the method felt a bit cumbersome. Discovering the suitable footprint requires navigating by way of a number of libraries, and there isn’t a easy solution to view all obtainable choices for a part in a single place.

Linking the footprint to the schematic image additionally felt disjointed, because it wasn’t all the time clear if the right one was chosen. There wasn’t a straightforward solution to confirm the accuracy of the footprint after it was added, which led to some further steps to make sure every part was accurately aligned. I discovered this to be time-consuming and a bit irritating, particularly when making an attempt to work effectively.

The studying curve can also be one thing to remember. Altium Designer is filled with options, which is nice for skilled customers however may be overwhelming for learners like me. The interface is filled with choices, and it took me a big period of time to familiarize myself with all of the instruments.

What I dislike about Altium Designer:

• The system necessities for Altium Designer had been difficult for me, because it requires a number of reminiscence and processing energy. On much less highly effective computer systems, I skilled slowdowns and lag, which considerably impacted my workflow, particularly with bigger, extra complicated initiatives.
• Including footprints to units was a irritating course of for me. Navigating by way of a number of libraries and linking the footprint to the schematic image wasn’t easy, and I discovered myself spending further time verifying every part was right, which slowed me down.

What G2 customers dislike about Altium Designer:

“One space for enchancment is including extra options to the “Producer Half Search.” Moreover, navigating the software program with no mouse may be difficult, particularly when utilizing a laptop computer. Proper-clicking and dragging on a trackpad may be irritating, although that’s partly as a result of laptop computer design. One other suggestion pertains to defining board dimension; as an illustration, once I wanted a board that was precisely 50mm x 50mm, it was arduous to attract exact traces. I ended up setting the grid dimension to 1mm and estimating the size. It will be useful to have a function that shows the size of line drawings or the size of the shapes being created.”

– Altium Designer Evaluation, Trevor M.

One of many standout options of Altium 365 is its real-time collaboration capabilities. It helped me join with circuit groups on the identical designs concurrently. Whether or not I used to be reviewing schematics or making PCB format changes, it ensured everybody was on the identical web page. The platform’s model management system ensured that each change is tracked, which allowed me to view revision histories or roll again to earlier variations with ease.

It has extremely environment friendly mission administration instruments which have made dealing with complicated designs a lot simpler, particularly once I’m engaged on intricate designs. I discovered the method of making and modifying parts to be each intuitive and highly effective, permitting for detailed work with out feeling overwhelming. I can see how this flexibility can be an enormous asset for groups, enabling them to handle large-scale initiatives with ease.

I’ve additionally actually loved working with the PCB format editor. It’s extremely customizable, which permits me to make changes to designs shortly and seamlessly. I actually appreciated the flexibility to effortlessly transition between schematic and PCB. It saved me a number of time, as I might shortly modify and export designs. For groups that must combine these modifications into their bigger platform-based initiatives, this function would make the whole course of rather more environment friendly, significantly when fast changes are required.

The 3D visualization function was one other space the place Altium 365 impressed me. I used to be in a position to visualize how parts match on the board with ease, particularly in tight areas. The software program’s help for .step 3D our bodies made it easy to see how every part would match collectively. What stood out was the 3D rendering pace – even when working with complicated parts, they rendered shortly with none noticeable lag. I discovered the “snap factors” function significantly helpful, because it helped me place even essentially the most awkward 3D our bodies with nice precision.

Lastly, the draftsman device has been an absolute spotlight. Producing high-quality meeting drawings was a breeze with just some clicks. This device allowed me to create detailed and visually interesting drawings, which I might think about can be very useful for manufacturing groups that want clear documentation for meeting.

Nevertheless, regardless of these optimistic experiences, there are a number of areas the place I feel Altium 365 might enhance. One of many challenges I confronted was with organising PCB routing guidelines. It required a little bit of programming information, which could not be beginner-friendly. Whereas I ultimately turned proficient, I might see how somebody new to one of these design software program may discover this function a bit difficult. A extra user-friendly interface for setting these guidelines would definitely make the method smoother for learners.

One other difficulty I encountered was with the design rule system. Some customized queries didn’t work as anticipated, significantly when making an attempt to arrange guidelines to disregard interfering parts. For instance, I created a “part clearance” rule with particular settings for vertical and horizontal clearance, however the rule didn’t persistently ignore collisions. Regardless of prioritizing the rule accurately, it didn’t work on some events, which was irritating.

I additionally bumped into a difficulty with monitor size calculation. There have been instances when Altium appeared to disregard small segments of the monitor on sure layers, which may very well be problematic when making an attempt to exactly match monitor lengths, particularly for impedance-controlled designs. This led to inaccuracies within the format, requiring me to manually modify and double-check sure areas.

On a number of events, Altium 365 additionally skilled reminiscence violation errors, which had been a bit regarding given the software program’s complexity. Whereas it labored nicely for many of my initiatives, bigger and extra complicated designs brought on the device to decelerate, particularly when working over a community. This resulted in longer load instances and delays in accessing recordsdata, which may very well be irritating throughout tight mission timelines.

Lastly, the Invoice of Supplies (BOM) function took longer than anticipated to generate. Moreover, it wanted to be up to date each time I made modifications to the schematic, which added delays to the workflow, particularly when working with frequent design revisions.

What I dislike about Altium 365:

• The setup of PCB routing guidelines required some programming information, which wasn’t very beginner-friendly, making the training curve steeper for brand spanking new customers. A extra user-friendly interface for these guidelines would enhance the expertise for these simply beginning out.
• I encountered points with the design rule system. Customized queries typically didn’t work as anticipated, particularly with part clearance guidelines, inflicting frustration when the foundations didn’t persistently forestall collisions.

What G2 customers dislike about Altium 365:

“The software program may be gradual to begin and entry recordsdata, particularly over a community. Some default settings, just like the connection matrix, generate pointless warnings that make it more durable to establish actual points. The Invoice of Supplies function takes time to generate and requires updates when modifications are made to the schematic. Moreover, the software program slows down with bigger designs, and whereas it integrates nicely with third-party parts, occasional points with mismatched footprints or image requirements can come up.”

– Altium 365 Evaluation, Hemant A.

What I dislike about PADS Skilled:

• The outdated GUI felt much less partaking and lacked intuitiveness, making it more durable for me to navigate and absolutely benefit from the person expertise in comparison with trendy PCB design instruments.
• Because of its complexity, organising the device initially was overwhelming, and a extra streamlined method would have saved me time and decreased frustration in the course of the onboarding course of.

What G2 customers dislike about PADS Skilled:

“One draw back of utilizing PADS Skilled is that it takes a big period of time to course of and compute analyses, even for one thing so simple as the dashboard, which may be fairly irritating.”

– PADS Skilled Evaluation, Souvik G.

I not too long ago explored Allegro X PCB Designer, and I discovered it distinctive for creating CPU motherboards and dealing with high-density interconnect (HDI) PCB designs.

Its potential to develop compact, space-efficient electronics whereas sustaining superior performance is spectacular. The device makes it doable to pack intricate parts into smaller areas, a function that basically stood out to me and felt like a big benefit for contemporary electronics design.

One in all my favourite options was the error correction system for schematic design. With its three-step course of, it made making certain schematic accuracy really feel intuitive and easy. It flagged errors early, corrected them logically, and validated the outcomes systematically, streamlining the design course of and minimizing potential errors.

I additionally appreciated the pre-analysis and post-analysis capabilities, which allowed me to catch and resolve points each earlier than and after the design section, making the whole workflow extra environment friendly and dependable.

The AI-based part automated the method of arranging parts on the PCB, saving me appreciable time. This automation additionally ensured exact and optimized placements that may sometimes require meticulous guide changes. It felt just like the device was doing the heavy lifting, leaving me free to concentrate on different features of the design.

I used to be additionally impressed by Allegro’s versatile workspace, which allowed me to customise the interface, instructions, and workflows to suit my private preferences. This adaptability was an enormous plus, because it made staying organized and productive a lot simpler. Aligning the device’s setup with my design habits felt like an effective way to enhance effectivity and luxury.

Nevertheless, the lengthy load instances, particularly throughout resource-heavy operations, had been irritating. Whether or not it was beginning the appliance, creating library symbols, or working with parts, I observed important lag. This difficulty turned significantly noticeable when dealing with a number of 3D fashions or board mapping, which took for much longer than anticipated and felt like a bottleneck within the workflow.

One other limitation I noticed was the dearth of complete design for manufacturing (DFM) stories. Whereas the device excels at creating PCBs, it doesn’t generate the detailed DFM stories wanted to make sure a design is prepared for manufacturing. I had to make use of exterior instruments to fill this hole, which added an additional step and a few inconvenience.

Safety issues additionally stood out. The cadence.pcb recordsdata aren’t protected nicely and may be simply reverse-engineered. For these working with delicate designs, this lack of strong safety might pose important dangers.

Moreover, the absence of a direct VBScript interface means customers may must study a brand new scripting language unique to Allegro. Whereas this is perhaps useful for superior customization, the training curve felt unnecessarily steep, particularly for individuals who aren’t accustomed to Allegro’s scripting atmosphere.

What I dislike about Allegro X PCB Designer:

• Throughout my testing, I observed important delays when performing resource-heavy duties like dealing with 3D fashions or board mapping. These lengthy load instances made the workflow really feel much less environment friendly.
• I discovered the absence of complete DFM stories limiting. To completely assess my take a look at designs for manufacturing readiness, I needed to discover exterior instruments, which added pointless complexity.

What G2 customers dislike about Allegro X PCB Designer:

“The software program must be backward suitable with older revisions. It requires switching between totally different toolsets, and the whole workflow is not simply built-in. STEP export recordsdata do not work nicely with SolidWorks, and managing libraries and variants may be troublesome.”

– Allegro X PCB Designer Evaluation, Vijay P.

Throughout my testing of Autodesk Fusion, I explored a wide range of options, and it is clear that the software program has rather a lot to supply manufacturing groups.

One facet that stood out to me was the 3D design and modeling instruments. These instruments are extremely highly effective and permit for the creation of each easy elements and complicated buildings.

A function I discovered significantly useful is manufacturing integration. Fusion permits designs to be taken immediately by way of to manufacturing, which simplifies the method. As a substitute of switching between a number of platforms for design and manufacturing, every part is consolidated in a single place. For manufacturing groups, this function is invaluable because it reduces the probabilities of errors and ensures all elements of the method are streamlined.

Fusion’s simulation and evaluation instruments permit for simulations like stress checks and movement evaluation, serving to manufacturing groups take a look at designs digitally earlier than shifting to manufacturing. By figuring out potential points, these instruments saved me time, at the same time as a newbie. 

Some of the revolutionary options I examined was generative design. This device permits me to enter design targets and constraints, and Fusion then generates a number of design choices that meet these standards. For manufacturing groups, this may be extremely helpful for exploring new design potentialities and optimizing effectivity, because the software program suggests design options that may not have been thought of in any other case.

Nevertheless, I did encounter a number of challenges throughout testing. Assemblies in Fusion may be troublesome to handle, particularly when coping with bigger designs. Organizing and navigating by way of the totally different elements can turn out to be cumbersome, and it may be arduous to shortly find particular parts when changes are wanted. 

One other space the place I encountered some problem was with 2D drawings. Whereas Fusion does provide primary instruments for creating 2D drawings from 3D fashions, I discovered that the choices obtainable for detailed 2D designs had been restricted. For extra intricate drawings, I needed to export the design to AutoCAD to make the most of extra superior instruments. This lack of flexibility within the 2D instruments may very well be improved for manufacturing groups that want detailed and complicated 2D representations.

Lastly, I bumped into some points with file conversion when exporting designs. Regardless of Fusion supporting many file codecs, I observed that some intricate particulars and geometries had been misplaced when the designs had been imported into different software program. This may very well be an issue for manufacturing groups that want exact, detailed designs preserved throughout totally different instruments.

What I dislike about Autodesk Fusion:

• Throughout my testing, I discovered it difficult to handle assemblies, particularly with bigger designs. Organizing and navigating by way of elements turned cumbersome, and finding particular parts shortly was troublesome.
• I encountered limitations with 2D drawings, the place Fusion’s primary instruments weren’t sufficient for creating detailed 2D representations. I needed to export designs to AutoCAD for extra superior choices, which added an additional step to the method.

What G2 customers dislike about Autodesk Fusion:

“Two features of Autodesk Fusion 360 that I discover much less favorable are its reliance on an web connection and its CAD file compatibility. Whereas being cloud-based affords important advantages, options like real-time collaboration and automated saving may be difficult in areas with restricted connectivity. Moreover, though Fusion 360 helps many file codecs, the conversion course of throughout export is commonly restricted, resulting in the lack of particulars or geometries when importing recordsdata into different software program.”

– Autodesk Fusion Evaluation, Juan M.

After testing Altium CircuitMaker, I can confidently say that this device has rather a lot to supply, significantly for these engaged on circuit design. I discovered a number of options that basically stood out, though I additionally encountered a number of challenges alongside the best way.

One of many options I appreciated essentially the most was the cloud integration. This allowed me to retailer all designs securely within the cloud, making them accessible from anyplace. It was extremely handy, as I did not have to fret about dropping my work or managing space for storing on my native machine. Moreover, the flexibility to collaborate simply with others is a big plus. Whether or not you are working remotely or on a team-based mission, this cloud function makes it seamless to share and work on designs collectively. The cloud-based nature additionally means I did not must manually again up my recordsdata, which saved a big period of time.

One other function that basically made a distinction was the Fusion 360 plugin. This plugin allowed me to effortlessly bridge the hole between digital and mechanical designs. I might work on my circuit design in CircuitMaker after which seamlessly transfer to Fusion 360 to tweak the mechanical parts or vice versa. This fluid integration between the 2 platforms saved me hours of remodeling and resolving alignment points, making certain that my digital and mechanical designs aligned completely.

The 3D know-how for visualizing schematics was additionally a game-changer. Seeing designs in 3D helped me perceive how the circuits would work together as soon as they had been bodily constructed. It supplied me with a a lot clearer image than conventional 2D views, and I used to be in a position to spot potential errors early on that may have been missed in a 2D atmosphere.

I additionally actually appreciated the flexibility to simply assign properties to parts. Including feedback or particular attributes to elements helped me keep organized and maintain monitor of modifications all through the design course of. It was significantly helpful for leaving reminders to myself or others about sure design selections or particular elements, making certain nothing was ignored.

The library that comes pre-loaded with Altium CircuitMaker is in depth and a real-time-saver. It consists of a variety of symbols, footprints, and 3D fashions, so I didn’t must go trying to find elements. I might entry not solely the elements themselves but in addition essential particulars like costing, stock info, and even distributor ideas. This made the designal course of a lot simpler, particularly once I didn’t have a pre-defined elements checklist. I might shortly pull up related parts and begin designing with out losing time on analysis or stock checks.

Nevertheless, there have been some challenges. Whereas the simulator mannequin works nicely for primary simulations, I discovered that the accuracy wasn’t all the time dependable for extra complicated circuits. The simulations typically didn’t precisely replicate real-world habits, which made me query whether or not a few of the designs would perform as anticipated as soon as constructed. This may very well be problematic for extra intricate designs the place exact habits is important.

One other difficulty I confronted was the shortcoming to save lots of my initiatives offline. Because the mission file needed to be saved within the cloud, I couldn’t work with out an web connection. This was significantly inconvenient once I was in an space with poor connectivity or once I simply wished the flexibleness to work offline. Whereas the cloud integration is nice general, I’d have most well-liked the choice to save lots of initiatives regionally for added flexibility and safety.

Moreover, I discovered the heavy reliance on group sharing to be a little bit of a disadvantage. Whereas the concept of sharing work with a big person base is perhaps interesting to some, I personally choose extra management over my initiatives. The community-driven facet felt a bit limiting, and I’d have appreciated extra independence in how my work is shared or stored non-public. For individuals who get pleasure from working independently, this may very well be a deal-breaker.

Lastly, as a Linux and MacOS person, I discovered the expertise lower than excellent. Since CircuitMaker is primarily designed for Home windows, I hadvert to arrange a digital machine to run the software program. Whereas it labored wonderful inside the digital machine, it added an additional layer of complexity to the setup. It wasn’t as seamless as utilizing a local software, and I might see how this may very well be irritating for customers outdoors of the Home windows ecosystem.

What I dislike about Altium CircuitMaker:

• I encountered points with simulation accuracy for complicated circuits. The simulator typically didn’t precisely replicate real-world habits, which raised issues in regards to the reliability of designs for extra intricate initiatives.
• The lack to save lots of initiatives offline was a serious inconvenience. Because the recordsdata needed to be saved within the cloud, I couldn’t work with out an web connection, which restricted my flexibility in sure conditions.

What G2 customers dislike about Altium CircuitMaker:

“CircuitMaker enforces cloud saving and permits solely two non-public initiatives, which may be limiting. The group part library is unmoderated, containing many unusable footprints (although it is advisable to create your individual, because the part wizard makes it simple). The software program may be considerably unstable, so saving regularly is essential. Moreover, the keyboard shortcuts differ from these in Altium Designer, which can take a while to regulate to.”

– Altium CircuitMaker Evaluation, Alberto V.

One function of Autodesk EAGLE that stood out to me virtually instantly was the person language applications (ULP), the built-in programming language. It helped me save time by automating repetitive processes, which might be useful when engaged on a number of designs or making frequent changes. I might create customized scripts tailor-made to my wants, giving me higher management over the workflow. For manufacturing groups trying to pace up manufacturing, this function could be a real-time-saver.

The autoroute perform is one other device that simplifies the design course of. In a producing context, the place time is essential, the flexibility to shortly route paths with minimal guide effort was invaluable. It allowed me to generate fast prototypes and focus extra on refining the core design quite than coping with routing points.

The device labored easily for schematic seize, which is essential in manufacturing for making certain accuracy. It helped me spot potential points early, lowering the chance of errors throughout manufacturing.

On the library administration aspect, Autodesk EAGLE impressed me with its in depth collection of pre-loaded CAD packages. This meant much less time spent looking for parts, permitting for quicker meeting and prototyping in manufacturing.

One draw back I encountered was with the 3D visualizer. Whereas practical, it didn’t provide the extent of accuracy I anticipated when visualizing how a PCB would look as soon as produced. In manufacturing, this degree of precision is important to make sure every part suits collectively accurately, and EAGLE’s 3D device didn’t fairly meet these expectations.

I additionally had points with the internet itemizing function, particularly when working with complicated energy PCBs. It didn’t all the time perform as anticipated, which led to delays and potential errors within the design section. Dependable internet listings are important for making certain correct electrical connections within the last product.

One other limitation was the restriction within the downloaded model of EAGLE, which limits designs to only two layers. This turns into a difficulty when working with extra complicated, multi-layer boards. For manufacturing groups engaged on high-density designs, this restriction may cause delays, forcing groups to discover different options or go for costlier variations of the software program.

Lastly, I really feel that routing intelligence may very well be improved. Presently, EAGLE makes use of commonplace routing paths, however integrating AI-based routing algorithms would considerably enhance effectivity. This might end in extra compact, optimized designs, pace up manufacturing instances, and reduce routing-related errors.

What I dislike about Autodesk EAGLE:

• I discovered the 3D visualizer to be a bit missing in accuracy. It didn’t present the extent of precision I wanted to visualise how the PCB would look as soon as produced, which might result in potential fitment points within the manufacturing section.
• I encountered points with the online itemizing function, significantly when working with complicated energy PCBs. It didn’t all the time work as anticipated, which brought on delays and will have led to errors in making certain correct electrical connections for the ultimate product.

What G2 customers dislike about Autodesk EAGLE:

“The system’s session timeout is kind of restrictive, because the platform prompts session expiration after a brief interval. It will be useful if there have been an possibility to increase the session length, giving customers extra flexibility to finish duties with out the priority of dropping their progress.” 

– Autodesk EAGLE Evaluation, Aryan Ok.

Most high-quality PCB design software program instruments are paid, however many provide free trials that will help you get began. Altium Designer, for instance, is broadly thought to be the most effective instruments within the {industry}, providing highly effective options for complicated designs. Its free trial could be a good start line. Discover extra free PCB design software program that provides primary options, which may be helpful for less complicated initiatives or learners.

Preserve issues grounded

Choosing the proper PCB design software program could be a game-changer on your initiatives. When evaluating these instruments, it’s important to think about elements like usability, efficiency, and options that finest align along with your particular wants—whether or not that’s dealing with complicated designs, enhancing sign integrity, or making certain easy collaboration.

Primarily based on my testing and person suggestions, I’ve outlined the highest instruments that supply the most effective mixture of effectivity, flexibility, and energy. The very best device is the one which works for you and helps you carry your PCB designs to life with none hiccups.

Don’t be afraid to dive in, experiment with totally different choices, and see what clicks. Bear in mind, even essentially the most refined software program can’t assist for those who don’t press the suitable buttons (until you’ve acquired a “design wizard” in your staff, through which case, please share their contact information with me).

Scale back errors by utilizing simulation and take a look at suites earlier than shifting your PCB design to manufacturing.