Subgingival margins are often required for biologic, mechanical, or esthetic reasons. Several investigations have demonstrated that their use is associated with adverse periodontal reactions, such as inflammation or recession. The purpose of this prospective randomized clinical study was to determine if two different subgingival margin designs influence the periodontal parameters and patient perception. Deep chamfer and feather-edge preparations were compared on 58 patients with 6 months follow-up. Statistically significant differences were present for bleeding on probing, gingival recession, and patient satisfaction. Featheredge preparation was associated with increased bleeding on probing and deep chamfer with increased recession; improved patient comfort was registered with chamfer margin design. Subgingival margins are technique sensitive, especially when feather-edge design is selected. This margin design may facilitate soft tissue stability but can expose the patient to an increased risk of gingival inflammation.