Maybe it's just the good dictators aren't called dictators. If we mean the word along the lines of 'benevolent [caring for their people at least as much as their own power, and using that power genuinely for their benefit] authoritarian', then I might suggest some examples include (had to google dates haha):
Atatürk (Mustafa Kemal), who led Turkey 1922-38. Definitely a dictator but he ended (until recent times anyway) the religious dominance of Turkey's government, gave women equal voting and inheritance rights, banned religious law and introduced a secular state, spread access to education and cultural activities which the Ottomans had banned, and broke up oligarchic landownership.
Josip Broz Tito, the Chilled Communist (1945-80). Initially just as dictatorial as other communist leaders, he chilled out a lot after about 1950 (and memorably stood up to Stalin who attempted, more than once, to have him assassinated), and allowed relatively free markets with businesses 'socially owned' by their workers (rather than by the state...basically he invented John Lewis). While the region of Yugoslavia is know often known for ethnic tensions, he gave all ethnicities and territorial units representation in the parliament, and actually preferred to delegate rather than acquire power for himself.
Paul Kagame, (President of Rwanda since 2000, and VP since 1994 before that), started off as a rebel military leader, but in 1994 used his army to stop the genocide (something the west rather failed/refused to do). Under his watch the country has been moved towards a wealthier, knowledge-based economy, state owned industries were denationalised, ethnicity was banned as a marker of identity to try and quel some of the tensions that led to the 1994 genocide. Might be worth noting that Rwanda currently has (61%) the highest proportion of female MPs in the world.
And we could look further into history and I'd suggest figures like Joseph II (Holy Roman Emperor) or Fredrick II ('the Great', King in/of Prussia) were also benevolent dictators
Not saying any of these people were/are remotely perfect, and they are/were all definitely authoritarian in the sense of not brooking a tremendous amount of opposition (though I don't think anyone suggests that Kagame wants opponents beaten up or imprisoned, more just bolsters his genuine popularity with bouts of electoral fraud), but I would argue that they used/use their dictatorial power for the betterment of the country and not to support either their own ideology or powerbase alone.
And yes Hitler was a vegetarian anti-smoking pro-fitness campaigner who built motorways but I think that's not enough in his credit column by quite a long chalk, before anyone suggests it.
