The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy and radiation dose of dual-source computed tomographic (DSCT) coronary angiography for assessment of coronary artery disease using prospective electrocardiographic triggering and retrospective electrocardiographically (ECG) gated spiral scans. One hundred sixteen patients who had undergone dual-source computed tomography and conventional coronary angiography were enrolled in this study. Fifty-four patients were scanned using retrospective ECG-gated protocols (group 1) and 62 patients using prospective ECG-triggered protocols (group 2). Diagnostic accuracy, image quality, and effective dose were compared between groups 1 and 2. Conventional coronary angiography was used as the reference standard. In total 1,709 (98.2%) coronary segments in the 116 patients were assessable with adequate image quality. Sensitivities and specificities of diagnosing coronary heart disease (≥50% stenosis) in a patient-based analysis of DSCT data were 93.3% and 88.9% in group 1 and 96.4% and 85.7% in group 2, respectively (p = 0.973 and 0.761). In vessel-based analysis, sensitivities and specificities were 77.4% and 94.1% in group 1 and 79.6% and 92.3% in group 2 (p = 0.983 and 0.985). Overall averaged image quality scores (using 1- to 4-point scale) in groups 1 and 2 were 3.3 ± 0.4 and 3.5 ± 0.9, respectively (p = 0.268). Prevalence of good (score 3.0) and excellent (score 4.0) image qualities of coronary vessels were 95.4% in group 1 and 92.4% in group 2 (p = 0.861). Effective doses were 8.82 ± 3.50 mSv (range 3.92 to 15.36) in group 1 and 2.95 ± 1.39 mSv (range 0.99 to 6.06) in group 2 (p <0.001). In conclusion, DSCT prospective ECG-triggered coronary angiography has equivalent image quality and diagnostic value compared to that of retrospective ECG-gated scans. Radiation dose was significantly decreased using prospective electrocardiographic triggering.