2020 CNCCookbook CAM Survey Results
Bob Warfield
Copyright 2020 by CNCCookbook, Inc.
Every year, CNCCookbook surveys readers on their CAM Software. The results provide an invaluable guide to CAM for the CNC World.. Overview
very year CNCCookbook surveys readers on their CAM Software. The results are a unique and Einvaluable guide to CAM for the CNC World.
This year we received over 400 responses. That’s up from our last survey, which got about 300 responses.
Product Managers at a variety of CADCAM companies, large and small, tell me they find the results very valuable in their own planning. There’s really no other source of information quite like these surveys, so I wanted to get these initial results out as soon as I could.
We’ve done these CAM surveys in 2010, 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and now 2020, so there is historical data to compare against when looking for trends. Note that the 2020 results are actually 2019, we just felt it would look funny to publish 2019 in 2020, especially given we conducted the survey at the beginning of 2020.
As in the past, we divide the market into 3 segments:
High-End: More expensive packages with more functionality.
Tiered: Modular packages available in a range of configurations that span from the Low-End to the High-End.
Low-End: These are inexpensive packages often used by Hobbyists, but as we’ll see, at least one package has come up-market to the Professional World.
Let’s start by taking a look by category at market share.
2020 CNCCookbook 2 CAM Software Survey CAM Segments CAM Breakdown by Segment
8%
39%
53%
High End Tiered Low End
his year, High End CAM was 39% of our responses vs 47% last year. Tier-priced CAM is up from 22% to 53%. The Low End is down from 31% to 8%. T Pretty much all of those moves can be attributed to Fusion 360 in the following ways: - We moved Fusion 360 from the Low End to the Tiered segment, hence the huge growth in tiered and loss of share in Low End. - The High End continues to lose share to Fusion 360. It’s a capable product that is good enough for many CNC’ers and it costs far less than the High End packages typically charge.
2020 3 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey CAM Market Share by Segment: High End High End CAM Market Share CNCCookbook 2020 CAM Survey
Mastercam 11.4% SolidCam 3.7% Type3 3.5% NX 3.2% Camworks 3.0% Gibbscam 2.7% Edgecam 1.7% Esprit 1.5% Powermill 1.2% Alphacam 1.0% Surfcam 0.7% Hypermill 0.7% EstlCam 0.7% Delcam 0.7% PTC Pro/E 0.5% FeatureCAM 0.5% Desk Proto 0.5% WorkNC 0.2% VisiCAM 0.2% Unigraphics 0.2% Router-CIM 0.2% Partmaker 0.2% MADCam 0.2% EnRoute 0.2% Catia 0.2%
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%
his year, High End CAM market share is still led led by Mastercam, which has an overall (not just high end share) share of 11.4%. Last year they had 12.3% share, so they’ve contracted a bt. T In second place we have SolidCam at 3.7%, which is a big gain from last year’s 1.8%. Last year HSMWorks / non-Fusion HSM was in second place. We re-classified it as tiered, but it would still be in 2nd otherwise.
2020 4 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey CAM Market Share: Tiered Segment Tiered Segment CAM Market Share CNCCookbook 2020 Survey
Fusion360 24.0%
Aspire / Vectric) 12.8%
BobCAD/CAM 5.9%
HSMWorks (Non Fusion 360) 4.4%
VisualMill / Mecsoft 2.7%
SprutCam 1.7%
OneCNC 0.5%
Solidworks Cam 0.2%
EZCam 0.2%
0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0%
In this category, Fusion360 leads, with 24% overall market share. Last year, Fusion360 had 24.2% overall share, so has seemingly plateuaed. Note that it is newly added to this segment.
Last year, Vectric / Aspire led this segment with 12.8% overall share so there’s no change this year.
Meanwhile the Mecsoft products switched places with BobCAD again. BobCAD moved from 3.14% to 5.9% and Mecsoft moved from 1.74% to 2.7%.
2020 5 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey CAM Market Share: Low End
Low End CAM Market Share CNCCookbook 2020 Survey
CamBam 2.0%
SheetCam 1.2%
MeshCam 1.2%
Conversational (PathPilot) 0.7%
DolphinCAM 0.5%
ZW3D 0.2%
WardCam 0.2%
SwiftCam 0.2%
Okuma Admac Parts 0.2%
Millwrite 0.2%
MakerCam 0.2%
Kcam 4 0.2%
JSCut 0.2%
Heeks Cam 0.2%
Cad Key 0.2%
0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5%
We moved Fusion 360 from the Low End Category to the Tiered Category, which allowed CamBam to move up to #1. It’s overall market share, however, declined from 2.7% to 2%. MeshCam is relatively unchanged.
Lots of packages are in this category, including some that are more conversational in nature or that are more specialized. WardCam is for waterjets, for example.
But overall, this category is down in size. Fusion 360 is a magnet at its price point and level of power that’s pulling people out of the low end.
2020 6 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey Overall CAM Market Share Overall CAM Market Share CNCCookbook 2020 Survey
Fusion360 24.0% Aspire / Vectric 12.8% Mastercam 11.4% BobCAD/CAM 5.9% HSMWorks (Non Fusion 360) 4.4% SolidCam 3.7% Type3 3.5% NX 3.2% Camworks 3.0% VisualMill / Mecsoft 2.7% Gibbscam 2.7% CamBam 2.0% SprutCam 1.7% Edgecam 1.7% Esprit 1.5% SheetCam 1.2% Powermill 1.2% MeshCam 1.2% Alphacam 1.0% Surfcam 0.7% Hypermill 0.7% EstlCam 0.7% Delcam 0.7% Conversational (PathPilot) 0.7% PTC Pro/E 0.5% OneCNC 0.5% FeatureCAM 0.5% DolphinCAM 0.5% Desk Proto 0.5% ZW3D 0.2% WorkNC 0.2% WardCam 0.2% VisiCAM 0.2% Unigraphics 0.2% SwiftCam 0.2% Solidworks Cam 0.2% Router-CIM 0.2% Partmaker 0.2% Okuma Admac Parts 0.2% Millwrite 0.2% MakerCam 0.2% MADCam 0.2% Kcam 4 0.2% JSCut 0.2% Heeks Cam 0.2% EZCam 0.2% EnRoute 0.2% Catia 0.2% Cad Key 0.2% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0%
2020 7 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey CAM Market Share: CNC Routers
Most Popular CAM for CNC Router Users CNCCookbook 2020 CAM Survey
Aspire / Vectric 33%
Fusion360 20%
Type3 13%
CamBam 4%
SolidCam 3%
VisualMill / Mecsoft 3%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
This year we’re adding the market shares for CNC Router users.
CNC Routers are often used quite differently than CNC Mills. In particular, they do a lot more artistic work such as signs and corporate logos. It’s not surprising, therefore, that the Aspire / Vectric software dominates this segment.
2020 8 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey Overall Share Analysis
Looking at overall share for 2020, we can see just how much Fusion360, Aspire/Vectric, and Mastercam dominate the CAM world. Here are the highlights:
- While still at the top, Fusion360 hasn’t grown overall share by much and neither has Aspire/Vectric. - MasterCam is down slightly from 12.3% to 11.4%. It’s the legacy standard, but others are regarded as more leading edge or easier to use. - HSMWorks, the non-Fusion 360 alternative with the same CAM engine is down hard from 9.6% to 4.4%. That’s interesting and makes me wonder if Fusion 360 isn’t cannibalizing some sales there, though it hasn’t increased its share in the process. - As mentioned Solidcam is up from 1.8% to 3.7%, NX is up from 1.8% to 3.2%, and Esprit is up from 0.9% to 1.5%. - Powermill, a former customer satisfaction winner in these surveys, is down from 3.7% to 1.2%. - In general, low share players keep getting whittled away while higher share players are growing. This suggests the market wants to consolidate at some point.
2020 9 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey Customer Satisfaction Awards
NX took top honors in the Customer Satisfaction area with a score of 1.79. This showed phenomenal improvement from the 2018 scores. Congratulations, Siemens!
2020 10 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey Silver Awards
SprutCAM took Silver with a score of 1.57. It was just ahead of CamBam, which had a 1.50 score.
2020 11 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey Satisfaction Scores
Here’s the big chart of all customer satisfaction scores. Note that we only include packages below that had at least 5 responses.
CAM Software Customer Satisfaction Scores CNCCookbook 2020 Survey
SheetCam 0.80
Edgecam 0.83
Powermill 1.00
MeshCam 1.00
BobCAD/CAM 1.08
Gibbscam 1.08
Mastercam 1.18
Camworks 1.25
HSMWorks (Non Fusion 360) 1.28
Aspire / Vectric 1.32
Fusion360 1.33
SolidCam 1.33
Type3 1.35
VisualMill / Mecsoft 1.36
Esprit 1.43
CamBam 1.50
SprutCam 1.57
NX 1.79
- 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00
2020 12 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey CAM Software Gripes
Biggest CAM Software Gripes CNCCookbook 2020 Survey
3D Toolpaths 1.2% Product is not updated enough 1.2% Cloud Issues 1.7% Poor Simulator 1.9% 4 and 5 Axis 2.3% Poor Feeds & Speeds 2.5% Support Issues 3.7% Poor Docs & Training 4.8% Slow 4.8% Post Issues 5.2% Too Expensive 7.9% Not Configurable Enough 7.9% Poor CAD or CAD Integration 11.7% Instability 11.9% Inefficient G-Code / Lack of Power 14.4% Poor UX 16.9%
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0% 16.0% 18.0%
What are the biggest gripes users have with their CAM Software?
You can see them laid out above. Poor UX (i.e. usability, user interface, hard to learn, hard to use) was tops, with about 17% of respondents complaining. CAM is hard to learn and use, it seems.
Second was lack of power. Users were trying to do something and couldn’t.
Third was instability. Apparently CAM software can be relatively buggy.
Another big area of concern was either built-in CAD features or integration with CAD.
Configurability is an interesting one. Shops want CAM to capture their best practices without having to configure them manually over and over again.
Poor feeds and speeds also came up repeatedly, as it has in prior years. In general, CAM Feeds and Speeds are mediocre at best. Get a stand alone Feeds and Speeds calculator like G-Wizard and you’ll do a lot better.
2020 13 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey CAM Software Gripes: Part 2
CAM Software Gripes CNCCookbook 2020 Survey 60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Poor UX Inefficient G-Code / Lack of Power Instability Poor CAD or CAD Integration Not Configurable Enough
In this chart we’ve taken the Top 15 CAM Packages by market share and spelled out what their users think of them on the Top 5 gripe categories.
It’s important to keep in mind that a user of a low-end package like Cambam has radically different needs and expectations versus a user of a high end package. That’s why the high end packages are getting dinged on “Lack of Power” more than the low end. Their users need all the power they can get. That’s why they pay the premium to get such packages.
2020 14 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey CAM Demographics What type of CNC Work do you do? CNCCookbook 2020 Survey
3D Print, 1.2% Plasma, 2.0%
Scanning, Turning, 20.4% 1.8% Waterjet, 0.5% Router, 23.0% Wire EDM, 0.9% Mill Turn, 0.5% Grinding, 0.3% Other, 1.2% Laser Engraving, 0.3%
Robotics, 0.2% Milling, 49.0%
In terms of the type of CNC Work respondents are doing, the majority is CNC Milling, followed by Router and Turning work. There’s a smattering of other activities that probably would’ve been larger had they been actual choices on the survey rather than write-ins.
If we look at trends versus last year’s survey, we see Routers now slightly ahead of Turning, Plasma moved up, and the whole new category of Scanning has appeared.
Are you evaluating new CAM Software at this time?
This year, 17.81% of respondents are considering new CAM Software to replace the package they currently use. That’s down from last year’s 19.3% of respondents. Customer Satisfaction was also up on a number of packages. This suggests that vendors are giving CAM users what they want which is generally making them more satisfied.
2020 15 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey Have you ever used Conversational Programming instead of CAM to save time?
60% of respondents have used Conversational Programming to save time over CAM. That score is up from last year’s 45% result. Controllers like Tormach’s Path Pilot are increasingly exposing folks to Conversational Programming.
Conversational Programming is a time saving and simpler alternative to CADCAM for certain jobs. I like to think of it as making it super easy to do all the sorts of things manual machinists do just by filling out a quick wizard.
Conversational Programming can be delivered as a stand-alone software package like our G- Wizard Editor or it can be built right into your CNC Control. It can make it a breeze to make simple parts or to add simple features to other parts.
Here’s G-Wizard Editor’s list of Conversational Turning Wizards to give an idea:
2020 16 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey Is your CAM Software integrated within your CAD Software?
68% of respondents said their CAM is integrated with their CAD. That score is almost identical to last year’s result of 67%.
Several folks wrote into the “Other” category that their CAM software was “associative” with their CAD program. What that means is even though they don’t run together in the same window, making changes to CAD are automatically reflected in CAM.
That associative linkage delivers 90% of the value of a true integration.
Do you modify your CAM-generated g-code by hand?
Results:
- Frequently: 14% (up from 10.75% last year) - Sometimes: 52% (up from 50.9% last year) - Never: 34% (down from 38.35%)
Being able to modify your CAM’s g-code can be a powerful tool. If your shop lacks this capability, you’re missing out on a lot of opportunity to improve automation and profitability.
To get an idea what’s possible, check out 37 things your CAM won’t do for you that g-code programming can. It will show you what’s possible with a little g-code programming added to CAM.
Our respondents use this capability to do the following kinds of things:
- Tweak tool offsets and feeds & speeds - Change work offsets like G54 - Add pauses for manual operations - Correct programming errors - Coordinate system changes - Adjust park location - Add optional stops - Adjust tool offsets - Modify drilling cycles as needed - Adjust for different stock sizes - Custom commands and subroutines - Control Pallet Changer - Improve comments for better documentation and maintainability - Changes to tweak and improve efficiency - Saves time on small changes vs re-running CADCAM - Probing and touch off - Compatibility across multiple machines in shop - Restart after crash / Rework parts - Make things easier for operators
2020 17 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey How do you test or proof your CAM-generated programs?
Proofing programs to avoid crashes and other errors is critical before you run them on a machine. Here’s how the survey respondents go about testing their programs:
- 13.41$ Cut “air” on the machine (up from 10.83% last year) - 63.06% run the code through the CAM simulator (down from 70.76% last year) - 8.71% use a stand alone simulator (down from 10.11% last year)
The remainder use some combination of the three.
It’s a shame the winner by a land slide is running code through the CAM Simulator rather than a stand alone simulator (although stand alone simulator use is up significantly).
The issue is the way CAM program simulators work. If your CAM program includes a true CNC g- code simulator, then yes, it can be used to help test g-code programs.
The thing is, most CAM programs don’t. They just plot the same geometry information that was used to create the g-code output by the postprocessor. This allows for subtle bugs to creep in that are not detectable in the CAM backplot.
For example, bugs in the post cannot be detected this way because the post is downstream of that geometry info. In other words, you aren’t really performing an independent test on the g-code. Relying on this type of simulator is fraught with peril.
Because of that, a lot of experienced machinists insist on a separate simulated backplot as a sanity check for their g-code before they’ll run it. It doesn’t cost very much or take very long to have this peace of mind, so it’s something you should consider.
Proving programs is just one of the reasons folks rely on our G-Wizard Editor software. We wrote an article that details the sorts of problems a simulator like G-Wizard can eliminate from your programs:
5 Ways G-Code Simulators Crush CNC Errors
2020 18 CNCCookbook CAM Software Survey