The first attempts for implanting femoral component in total hip arthroplasties were cemented. It was usually a successful treatment for patients over 60 years of age, but for younger and more active patients implant loosening and bone reserve deficits were quite frequent. Therefore cementless implantation methods were developed while on the other hand manual cementing techniques improved. The preference of cementless or cemented implantation in hip arthroplasties depends on many factors such as patient age, proksimal femoral shape, and bone quality of femur. Besides, each method has numerous of advantages and disadvantages which must be considered deliberately. Stress shielding, thigh pain, periprostetic fracture in cementless systems, cement characteristics, timing and techniques for cemented systems and moreover, implant stiffness and stem surface quality for both systems are still contemporary issues. Nowadays cementless prosthesis are used for younger and daily active patients; on the other hand, cemented prosthesis, are preferred for patients over 60 years of age. Limping and necessity of walking aids need to be reduced, no matter which method is used For this issue, soft tissue balance must be provided pricipally. Center of femoral rotation, femoral offset must be appropriate and leg length must be equalized, and abductor mechanism must be preserved. Preoperative templating is necessary to prepare the proper implants in theatre and be able to plan the desired anatomy.