In the South African sugarcane industry, as in many countries, poor adoption of irrigation scheduling is common, leading to ineffective use of irrigation water and loss in yield and income. The reasons for the lack of adoption include economic constraints, difficulty with implementation and human perceptions. To demonstrate the benefits of effective irrigation scheduling under local conditions, a demonstration trial was conducted over 5 years at Pongola, South Africa. Here, a fixed irrigation schedule (control) was compared with three scheduling treatments: (1) the MyCanesim® computer model with data from an automatic weather station; (2) soil-water data from a capacitance probe; and (3) a combination treatment, where MyCanesim® was integrated with a capacitance probe. The number of stress days from either under- or over-irrigation, along with the RV (recoverable value) yield, irrigation applied, irrigation water productivity (IWP) and financial benefits was used to assess each treatment. The adoption of irrigation scheduling was also evaluated through farmer surveys before and after the trial. When compared to the fixed-cycle control, the use of irrigation-scheduling techniques resulted in an increase of up to 13% in RV yield, a reduction of up to 58% in irrigation water applied, improved IWP of up to 23.9 t cane/100 mm of irrigation and financial benefits of up to ZAR10,487/(ha · a) (USD698/(ha · a)). The combination treatment incurred the least water-stress days, 79% lower than the control. Farmer surveys showed an increase of 45% in the adoption of irrigation scheduling, from 11% (n = 111) in 2014 to 56% (n = 100) in 2020. Although site-specific, the trial results show substantial benefits that can be realised by scheduling irrigation. The trial results compare well to other similar studies, showing that the results can be used in other areas to promote the adoption of irrigation scheduling.