2020 April Fools' Case: Normally we'd prank you with this but given the current COVID-19 crisis we decided just to release it straight up without trying to trick anyone. Hopefully you can at least still enjoy a little laugh at this difficult time - view case

1.5 T vs 3.0 T

Comparing 1.5 T vs 3.0 T  (1.5 tesla vs 3.0 tesla) MRI systems identifies a number of differences; a 3 T system has

It is important to emphasize that in common with standard scientific unit notation, a space must always be inserted between the quantity and the unit symbol, therefore 1.5 T and 3 T are correct, conversely 1.5T and 3T are incorrect, despite the latter usages often being seen in medical media and some radiology reports.

Theoretically, signal is proportional to the square of the static field strength (B0) whereas noise increases linearly. This implies that, in a perfect system, the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of a 3 T system would be twice as good as at 1.5 T. In reality, due to an increase in susceptibility effects in most tissues, the actual improvement is only in the 30-60% range (instead of 100%). With this increased SNR, the spatial resolution and/or acquisition time can be improved, depending on which is more important for the particular case.

Specific absorption rate (SAR) is defined as the amount of radiofrequency energy (joules) deposited in tissues (kg). The limit set by the FDA is an amount which results in an increase of 1-degree centigrade in any tissue 2. SAR is proportional to the static field (B0) squared, meaning that a 3 T system deposits 4 times as much energy within tissue as a 1.5 T system. Additionally, SAR is proportional to

  • pulse duration and length
  • pulse number
  • slice number
  • flip angle

The dependence of SAR on flip angle results in a relatively large amount of energy deposition for standard spin echo sequences since they use 90-degree flip angles. As a result, there is increased use of gradient echo sequences, which use smaller flip angles. Unfortunately, these latter sequences image T2* and not T2, and are therefore more susceptible to local field artefacts. These problems have largely been overcome with modern units.

Rapid gradient switching leads to an increase in the intensity of the acoustic noise, which requires better insulation of both the unit itself and the containing room.

Physics and Imaging Technology: MRI
Share article

Article information

rID: 801
Synonyms or Alternate Spellings:
  • 1.5 tesla versus 3 tesla
  • 1.5 tesla versus 3.0 tesla
  • 1.5 T versus 3 T
  • 1.5T versus 3T
  • 1.5T versus 3.0T
  • 1.5 tesla vs 3.0 tesla MRI systems
  • 1.5T vs 3.0T
  • 1.5T vs 3T

Support Radiopaedia and see fewer ads

Cases and figures

  • Case 1: 3 T v 1.5 T MRI prostate with total hip prosthesis
    Drag here to reorder.
  • T2W axial normal ...
    Case 2: Normal prostate gland (3 T T2WI)
    Drag here to reorder.
  • Case 4: Normal lumbar spine MRI: 3 T
    Drag here to reorder.
  • Case 5: Normal MRI whole spine: 3 T
    Drag here to reorder.
  • Case 3: Normal wrist - 3 T MRI
    Drag here to reorder.
  • Updating… Please wait.

     Unable to process the form. Check for errors and try again.

     Thank you for updating your details.