In the field of electronic design, Altium Designer (AD), PADS, and Cadence Allegro are the three mainstream PCB design tools in engineering projects.  

Based on actual feedback from engineers, the following outlines the core features of these three software tools and the scenarios they are better suited for. (Don’t miss the content at the end!)  

**Altium Designer**  

**Advantages:**  

1. High degree of workflow integration: Schematic design, PCB layout, rule checking, and manufacturing output are all within the same environment, making it suitable for fast-paced, small teams with limited personnel.  

2. Low learning curve: Features a Chinese interface, intuitive operation logic, and mature bidirectional synchronization between schematics and PCB, reducing repetitive work and minimizing oversights during modifications.  

3. Comprehensive resources and visualization: Relatively rich component libraries and 3D views for checking height and assembly interference help avoid basic errors in advance.  

**Disadvantages:**  

1. High licensing costs: The subscription model may not be friendly to individual users or small teams.  

2. Limitations in complex designs: Compared to high-end professional tools, its performance stability and rule management capabilities may fall short in high-density multi-layer boards, strict high-speed constraints, or very large-scale projects.  

3. Feature redundancy: Some extended functions are rarely used in basic PCB design, adding to the learning and resource burden for certain users.  

**Applicable Scenarios:**  

Suitable for small to medium-sized projects such as consumer electronics and industrial control, as well as educational and entry-level PCB design. Particularly friendly to small teams emphasizing efficiency and workflow completeness.  

👉 Click to view software details  

**PADS**  

**Advantages:**  

1. Clear engineering logic: The workflow for schematics, PCB design, and constraint management follows traditional engineering practices, making it easier for engineers with PCB experience to develop standardized design habits.  

2. Balanced performance and stability: Offers better operational stability and responsiveness than entry-level tools in medium to high-complexity multi-layer board designs, making it suitable for long-term engineering projects.  

3. Relatively comprehensive rule and constraint capabilities: Clear support for differential pairs, length matching, spacing, and other rules.  

**Disadvantages:**  

1. Relatively high learning curve: The interface and operation logic are somewhat traditional, requiring time and effort for beginners to adapt.  

2. Engineering-oriented schematic experience: Schematic functionality emphasizes process consistency, relying heavily on design standards and library management.  

3. Limited capabilities for extremely complex high-speed designs: Rule management depth and flexibility may be insufficient for extreme high-speed, high-density, and heavily constrained scenarios.  

**Applicable Scenarios:**  

Suitable for design teams with some PCB experience, emphasizing engineering standards and long-term stability. Commonly used in industrial control, communication equipment, and medium-complexity projects.  

👉 Click to view software details  

**Cadence Allegro**  

**Advantages:**  

1. Outstanding capabilities for complex designs: Excels in stability and controllability for high-density multi-layer boards, high-speed signals, and strictly constrained conditions.  

2. Mature constraint management system: Provides a comprehensive Constraint Manager for systematic management of electrical, physical, topological, and multi-level rules, making it a core advantage for high-speed design.  

3. Suitable for enterprise-level collaboration: Supports large-scale design data management, ideal for enterprise-level projects requiring multi-person collaboration and strict process standards.  

**Disadvantages:**  

1. High learning curve and usage barrier: The operation logic is highly professional, making it difficult for beginners to get started quickly and heavily reliant on engineering experience.  

2. High deployment and usage costs: Licensing fees, training, and environment setup costs are high, making it more suitable for medium to large enterprises.  

3. Not friendly for entry-level or small projects: Efficiency advantages may not be fully realized in simple or fast-paced small projects.  

**Applicable Scenarios:**  

Ideal for high-speed, high-density, and large-scale PCB design projects, as well as industries with strict requirements for design standards, collaboration, and reliability. While not typically the first choice for small projects or beginners, it is almost irreplaceable in complex engineering scenarios.  

👉 Click to view software details  

Functional comparisons are ultimately static. The vitality of software lies in the day-to-day engineering practices and word-of-mouth among engineers.  

In recent years, the ecosystem of PCB design tools has continued to diversify, and real user feedback often reveals more about a tool’s characteristics and limitations than official manuals.  

When it comes to tool selection, engineers often have their own “personal formulas.”  

Some summarize it as: “Use JLCPCB EDA for simple boards, and KiCad for complex ones.”  

Others are more direct: “No matter how simple or complex, Allegro is the ultimate choice.”  

Open-source tools like KiCad have gained significant attention. Many engineers note that after switching from commercial software to KiCad, the most noticeable difference is its “lightweight, fast response, and low hardware requirements.”  

Some recall: “KiCad was the first tool I used after graduation.”  

Cloud-based integrated platforms offer another path. JLCPCB EDA has rapidly gained popularity among individual developers, educators, and startups by integrating the design environment, component libraries, and manufacturing services, creating a closed loop from design to production. Its ease of use and extensive component library are highly praised.  

Regarding JLCPCB EDA, discussions often highlight: “Easy to learn, comprehensive component library.”  

A veteran engineer with 30 years of experience stated bluntly: “High-end mobile phone and computer PCBs use Allegro, mid-range products often use Altium Designer, and in specific fields like consumer electronics manufacturing, PADS remains widely used.”  

In discussions about high-end tools, some often steer the conversation toward Xpedition: “What Allegro can do, Xpedition can do too, and in some cases where Allegro reaches its limits, Xpedition offers more flexibility.”  

Overall, new tools have not replaced traditional software but have made the choice more scenario-based and layered.  

As one engineer noted: “The tool you use depends heavily on your environment.” Company workflows, industry standards, project complexity, and team experience collectively form a more critical decision-making framework than the tool’s features alone.  

Ultimately, mastering a tool to achieve a state of “human-machine integration” is the true goal in engineering practice.  

Which PCB tool do you use most often in your actual projects? Feel free to share in the comments section.