CEREC® Materials vs. Traditional Dental Lab: What Every Dentist Should Know Before Choosing

Published by CAD/CAM Center Miami | Educational Series

If you're evaluating CEREC® for your practice, understanding the available CEREC materials is just as important as choosing the scanner or milling unit. Today's chairside workflow includes materials for crowns, inlays, onlays, veneers, provisionals, and other restorative indications.

In this guide, we'll compare common CEREC crown materials, their clinical uses, and how chairside CAD/CAM materials compare with restorations produced by a traditional dental lab.

What Materials Can You Use With CEREC®?

CEREC® chairside systems mill restorations directly from prefabricated ceramic blocks. Over the past four decades, these materials have evolved dramatically. Today, several material categories are commonly used in chairside CAD/CAM workflows, depending on the restoration, esthetic requirements, strength requirements, and processing workflow.

1. Feldspathic Ceramic (e.g., CEREC Blocs)

The original CEREC® material. Ideal for inlays, onlays, and veneers where esthetics are the priority. Excellent optical properties, highly translucent, and easy to adjust chairside. Best suited for anterior restorations and low-stress posterior situations.

2. Lithium Disilicate (e.g., IPS e.max® CAD, CEREC Tessera®)

The current gold standard for chairside CAD/CAM. IPS e.max® CAD demonstrates an average survival rate of 95.2% over a period of up to 15 years — a benchmark that rivals lab-fabricated ceramic restorations. Blocks are milled in a pre-crystallized (blue) state for easy machining, then crystallized chairside in as little as 14 minutes with a SpeedFire furnace. Indicated for crowns, onlays, veneers, and anterior/posterior single units.

3. Zirconia-Reinforced Lithium Silicate (e.g., Celtra Duo®)

This material exhibits increased flexural strength and chameleon-like aesthetics compared with standard lithium disilicate, with no additional crystallization step required after milling — making it one of the fastest chairside workflows available.

4. PMMA (Polymethylmethacrylate)

Used primarily for long-term provisionals and implant-supported restorations. Not a final material, but invaluable for complex cases requiring temporization while the definitive plan is confirmed.

What Is the Best CEREC® Crown Material?

There isn't one CEREC® crown material that is best for every restoration. The right choice depends on the clinical indication, strength requirements, esthetic goals, location in the mouth, and the workflow available in the practice.

Lithium disilicate is widely used for single-unit restorations because it combines strength with excellent esthetics. It can be used for many crowns, inlays, onlays, and veneers.

Feldspathic ceramic is particularly useful when translucency and esthetics are priorities, especially for veneers and selected anterior restorations.

Zirconia and other high-strength CAD/CAM materials may be considered when strength is a primary concern, depending on the indication and the capabilities of the milling and firing workflow.

The best material is therefore not simply the strongest or most esthetic block. It is the material that best matches the restoration, preparation, milling system, and desired clinical result.

How to Choose the Right CEREC® Block

Choosing a CEREC® block starts with the restoration you intend to produce. Material composition, block size, shade, translucency, strength, and post-milling requirements can all affect the choice.

Before selecting a block, consider:

• Restoration type: crown, veneer, inlay, onlay, or provisional
• Material: lithium disilicate, feldspathic ceramic, zirconia, hybrid ceramic, or PMMA
• Esthetic requirements: shade and translucency
• Strength requirements: particularly for posterior and high-load restorations
• Milling compatibility: confirm that the material and block size are compatible with your milling unit
• Post-processing: some materials require crystallization, sintering, staining, or glazing while others can simplify the chairside workflow

For practices that mill restorations regularly, keeping the appropriate combination of blocks, burs, and finishing materials available can also reduce interruptions in the same-day workflow.

Material selection also depends on the capabilities of the milling unit. If you're comparing milling platforms, see our CEREC MC XL vs. Primemill guide.

The Traditional Lab Workflow: What You're Actually Comparing

When a dentist sends a case to the lab, the typical workflow involves:

1. Physical impression or digital scan sent to the lab
2. Model fabrication and die preparation
3. Wax-up or digital design
4. Material selection, pressing or milling, layering
5. Glazing and staining
6. Return shipping and second appointment for cementation

Turnaround: typically 7–14 business days. During this time, the patient wears a temporary restoration, which carries its own set of clinical risks (debonding, sensitivity, fracture, patient dissatisfaction).

CEREC® Materials vs. Lab: The Honest Comparison

Clinical Outcomes

The evidence supports chairside CAD/CAM as a legitimate clinical alternative. A systematic review and meta-analysis found that the biological, technical, and aesthetic behaviors showed similar clinical outcomes between CAD/CAM and conventional groups, with lithium disilicate showing notably strong clinical performance.

A 2025 retrospective cohort study comparing zirconia and lithium disilicate restorations over 5 years found cumulative survival rates of 94% and 89% respectively — with no statistically significant difference between the two materials in survival rates or technical complications.

In short, published evidence supports chairside CAD/CAM restorations as a clinically viable alternative to conventional lab-fabricated restorations for many single-unit indications, provided appropriate case selection, material selection, and clinical protocols are followed.

Esthetics

This is where many dentists hesitate. The assumption is that a skilled ceramist at a lab will always produce a more esthetic result. For highly complex anterior cases with demanding esthetic requirements, that may still be true.

But for the bulk of everyday restorations — posterior crowns, onlays, inlays, and standard anterior cases — a well-executed CEREC® crown equals the quality and appearance of a well-done lab-fabricated crown.

Modern lithium disilicate blocks offer a wide shade range, multiple translucency levels (LT, MT, HT), and can be individualized with stains and glazes chairside before final crystallization.

Chairside Workflow and Turnaround Time

This is where CEREC® has no competition.

• Traditional lab: 7–14 days + 2 patient appointments
• CEREC® chairside: same-day delivery, single appointment possible

The chairside process using CEREC® avoids the final impression process, temporization process, and second dental appointment generally required to complete high-strength all-ceramic crowns from a dental laboratory.

For your patients, that means one anesthesia episode, no temporaries to manage, and a permanent restoration they walk out with the same day. For your practice, that means improved scheduling efficiency and a clear differentiator in your market.

Material Consistency

One underappreciated advantage of CAD/CAM blocks is manufacturing consistency. CAD/CAM approach has been introduced in dentistry as a precise, efficient, accurate and error-free tool to produce high-quality dental restorations, as opposed to the traditional way of manual manufacture, which is prone to numerous subjective errors.

Every block comes from a controlled industrial process. There are no voids, no porosity variations, and no technician-dependent inconsistencies in the core material.

Cost to the Practice

This is where the math becomes compelling over time. Lab fees for a PFM or all-ceramic crown typically range from $80–$200+ per unit depending on the lab and material. With chairside CAD/CAM:

• You control material costs (blocks typically range from $15–$40 per unit depending on material and supplier)
• You eliminate shipping and handling delays
• You recapture the lab margin
• You eliminate the cost of provisional materials and the clinical time to fabricate and cement them

When Should You Still Use the Lab?

CEREC® is not the answer for every case. There are situations where lab fabrication remains the better choice:

• Multi-unit bridges beyond 3 units — though CAD/CAM bridge blocks exist, complex span cases still favor lab workflow
• Full-mouth reconstructions requiring extensive vertical dimension changes and precise occlusal calibration
• Highly complex anterior esthetic cases where individual layering by a skilled ceramist adds clinical value the patient has explicitly prioritized
• Implant-supported full-arch cases with screw-retained components requiring milled titanium frameworks

For everything else — and that includes the majority of restorative dentistry done in a general practice — CEREC® materials are fully capable.

The Material Selector: Quick Reference

Ready to Stock Your CEREC® System?

If your practice already uses CEREC® technology — or you're evaluating it — having the right materials inventory matters. At CAD/CAM Center Miami, we carry the blocks used in the workflows described in this guide:

• CEREC® Blue Blocks — Lithium Disilicate (Qty: 5) — Pre-crystallized lithium disilicate for standard chairside milling workflows. Compatible with MCXL and MC X5 milling units.
• CEREC® LiSi Fully Crystallized Blocks — C14 (Qty: 5) — Fully crystallized lithium disilicate. No post-milling firing required. Ideal for practices optimizing single-visit workflow speed.

Both ship free in 2 business days on orders over $100. Browse the full CEREC® Supplies & Accessories catalog for burs, accessories, and more.

References

1. Aswal GS, et al. Clinical Outcomes of CAD/CAM (Lithium disilicate and Zirconia) Based and Conventional Full Crowns and Fixed Partial Dentures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cureus. 2023. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.37888
2. Topdagi B, et al. Comparison of Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Zirconia and Lithium Disilicate Prostheses: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Biomimetics. 2025. DOI: 10.3390/biomimetics10110740
3. Ivoclar USA. IPS e.max CAD — Clinical Documentation. ivoclar.com/en_us
4. Ionescu AM, et al. Evaluation of the Surface Properties of Three CAD/CAM Ceramics: A Comparative In Vitro Study. Dentistry Journal. 2025. DOI: 10.3390/dj13120550
5. Davidowitz G, Kotick PG. The Use of CAD/CAM in Dentistry. Dent Clin North Am. 2011. PMC4402686
6. Levin L, et al. Restoring Teeth with an Advanced Lithium Disilicate Ceramic: A Case Report and 1-Year Follow-Up. PMC9507783

CAD/CAM Center Miami is a certified pre-owned CEREC® equipment reseller serving dental professionals across the United States. This article is intended for educational purposes.