Metal 3D Printing: DMLS vs SLM vs Binder Jetting Compared
Metal additive manufacturing is not one technology: it's several, each with different strengths. This comparison helps you choose between DMLS, SLM, and Binder Jetting based on your requirements for density, cost, and production volume.
Want live pricing? Compare 3D printing prices across verified suppliers.
DMLS: The Industry Standard
Direct Metal Laser Sintering partially melts metal powder, producing parts with 95-99% density. It's the most widely available metal AM process with the broadest material selection. Best for: aerospace components, medical implants, complex geometries that can't be CNC machined.
SLM: Full Density Metal
Selective Laser Melting fully melts the powder, achieving 99.5%+ density. This means better mechanical properties than DMLS, closer to wrought metal. Best for: critical structural parts, aerospace, energy sector components where maximum strength is required.
Binder Jetting: Speed and Scale
Binder Jetting jets a binder onto metal powder, then sinters in a furnace. It's dramatically faster than laser-based methods and doesn't need support structures. However, parts shrink ~20% during sintering and achieve lower density (97-99%). Best for: high-volume production, cost-sensitive applications, larger parts.
Technologies compared: DMLS, SLM, Binder Jetting.
Frequently asked questions
What is the cheapest metal 3D printing method?
Binder Jetting is typically the cheapest for batches above 20 parts. For single prototypes, DMLS may be more cost-effective because it doesn't require a separate sintering step.
Which metal AM process gives the strongest parts?
SLM produces the densest, strongest parts (99.5%+ density), closest to wrought metal properties. DMLS is close behind. Binder Jetting parts may have slightly lower mechanical properties depending on sintering conditions.
Can metal 3D printed parts be as good as CNC machined?
In terms of material properties, SLM parts can match or exceed cast metal. However, surface finish and tolerances typically require post-machining on critical surfaces. The advantage of AM is in geometric freedom: internal channels, lattice structures, and topology-optimized shapes that CNC can't produce.