CO2 Lasers · head to head

xTool P2S vs Glowforge Pro

xTool P2S (55W CO2) vs Glowforge Pro (45W CO2): work area, tube power, software posture, running cost, and which desktop CO2 earns faster for a seller.

A quick, honest note: some links on this page are affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate we may earn a commission when you buy through them — at no extra cost to you. It never changes the price you pay.

Side A

xTool P2S

55W desktop CO2

Check xTool P2S price

Side B

Glowforge Pro

45W desktop CO2

Check Glowforge Pro price

Spec-for-spec

Spec	xTool P2S	Glowforge Pro
Tube (published)	55W CO2 glass tube	45W CO2 tube
Work area	~600×308mm bed, pass-through option	~495×279mm usable, pass-through slot
Camera & placement	Dual cameras, offline-capable software	Overhead camera, cloud-based workflow
Software posture	Local control; third-party friendly	Cloud app; ecosystem-first, subscription features
Air assist & rotary	Included air assist; rotary supported	Air assist built in; no first-party rotary
Seller math	More watts per dollar; open workflow	Premium onboarding; materials ecosystem priced in

Specs standardized from published manufacturer data and consistent owner reports — we don’t operate a lab.

The verdict

On paper this is 55 published watts against 45, a wider bed, and an offline workflow against the smoothest cloud onboarding in the category. Per spec sheets and consistent owner reports, the P2S cuts thicker stock faster and costs meaningfully less to put on the bench — value the class benchmark has to answer.

The Glowforge case is real but specific: if the machine will be shared with non-technical users and onboarding friction is the enemy, its polish is worth money. If margin per unit and open file workflow decide your week — the seller’s week — the P2S posture wins this one.

Check xTool P2S price Check Glowforge Pro price

Read the full teardown →

Reader favorites