How to Benchmark PCB Layout Productivity: Quilter, Altium and KiCad

A useful PCB productivity benchmark answers a project question: how much effort does each workflow need to produce a design that meets the same requirements? Choose a representative board and measure the complete process rather than comparing a routing screenshot with a finished release.

Updated September 2026: the earlier numerical results were removed because the underlying test records were unavailable. The method below is intended for collecting verifiable results on your own designs.

Freeze a common starting point

Archive the schematic, libraries, board outline, stack-up, fixed placements and design rules. Record the CAD versions and every conversion or repair needed to import the project. A small microcontroller board can be a useful first test, but its result should not be generalized to dense memory or RF designs.

Write down who performs each run and their experience with the tool. Either hold placement constant to compare routing alone or include placement in every workflow. Record differences that cannot be normalized.

Measure four separate clocks

• Preparation: fixing input data, assigning constraints and preparing the run.
• Active engineering: placement, routing, candidate review and manual cleanup.
• Automated runtime: computation, with queue time identified separately.
• Elapsed calendar time: the interval to the agreed acceptance gate, including waiting for reviews.

Do not add overlapping unattended runtime to human effort. Record failed attempts and rejected candidates: selecting only the fastest successful run hides the cost of reaching it.

Use the same finish line

Define the required connectivity, design-rule checks, manufacturing review and any interface-specific analysis before testing. A completed route is not sufficient if another workflow includes tuning, documentation and final review. Keep tool-reported checks separate from analyses or physical tests performed by your team.

KiCad documents its PCB design and rule-checking tools. Quilter describes candidate generation and native CAD output. Use product documentation to plan the workflow, then measure the selected versions and project yourself.

Report the result with its context

For each workflow, publish the input revision, versions, operator context, phase times, unresolved violations, manual edits and acceptance outcome. Repeat runs where practical and report variation rather than only the best result.

Calculate effort reduction as (baseline active hours − alternative active hours) ÷ baseline active hours × 100%. Use the same boundary for both values. A negative result means the alternative required more effort. A zero baseline makes the percentage undefined.

Make the pilot actionable

Select the workflow that meets your acceptance criteria with a useful balance of effort, elapsed time and integration cost. A result on one board is evidence for that board. Expand to additional board classes before using it to forecast an entire engineering portfolio.