Compared · Laser, ultrasound or radiofrequency

Time Freeze vs Ultherapy vs Thermage

Three energies, different reach, and no ranking

Time Freeze Laser LCLR® heats the dermis and superficial fat, Ultherapy places focused ultrasound down to the SMAS, and Thermage heats the dermis with radiofrequency. Dr Sin Yong performs all three, so the choice follows the face.

Laser
Time Freeze Laser LCLR®
Ultrasound
Ultherapy Prime
Radiofrequency
Thermage FLX
Dr Sin Yong
Performs all three

In Brief

Time Freeze Laser LCLR®, Ultherapy and Thermage are different energies with different reach, so they are not ranked. Dr Sin Yong performs all three. He uses Time Freeze for a puffy or heavier area, the VF Lift for a lean one, Ultherapy for structural descent in a face of normal fullness, and Thermage for loose skin alone.

At a Glance: Time Freeze vs Ultherapy vs Thermage

Time Freeze Laser LCLR®Long-pulsed 755 nm and 1064 nm laser in the dermis and superficial fat, with a Sculpting mode.
Ultherapy PrimeMicro-focused ultrasound with imaging, at 1.5, 3.0 and 4.5 mm, down to the SMAS.
Thermage FLXMonopolar radiofrequency that heats the dermis as a volume.
Lean facesNone of the three is planned. The VF Lift is used instead.
Excess fillerTime Freeze has a Sculpting mode aimed at settled product, after mapping.
Who performs themDr Sin Yong, personally.

What the Research Shows: Time Freeze vs Ultherapy vs Thermage

  • A rater-blinded study of 35 people measured brow height after one focused ultrasound treatment. At 90 days, raters judged 86% to have a clinically significant lift, with a mean change of 1.7 mm. [1]
  • A multicentre study of monopolar radiofrequency around the eyes in 86 people found at least one grade of wrinkle improvement in 83.2% of areas on blinded photographs. Treating physicians noted improvement in 28.9%, and 50% of subjects were satisfied. [2]
  • A survey of 5,700 monopolar radiofrequency treatments reported immediate tightening in 26% with an older high-energy method and 87% with a lower-energy, multiple-pass method. It was a physician survey with no control group. [3]
  • A randomised split-face study of 20 Korean subjects measured a 45.1% fall in mean wrinkle grade on the treated side, four weeks after three sessions of long-pulsed 1064 nm laser. Time Freeze uses this wavelength, but the study did not test its protocol. [4]
  • Subcutaneous tissue atrophy is described after focused ultrasound in a case series, and fat atrophy is listed among less frequent reactions after monopolar radiofrequency. Neither abstract gives a rate. [5] [6] More fat loss than intended is listed as a rare risk of Time Freeze, and no published study gives a rate for it.

Figures describe published study groups, which may have used other devices or protocols. They do not predict your result. Updated 6 November 2026.

About This Comparison

Each one is a device

Dr Sin Yong tells patients that each of these is a device, as a suture is a tool in a surgeon's hand. A device does what it is built to do. What a person notices depends on whether the energy suited that face, which layer was at fault, and how the treatment was planned.

He performs Time Freeze, Ultherapy Prime and Thermage FLX himself, along with HIFU and thread lifts, so this page is about what each energy does and not which one ranks higher.

Read more in the article on device or technique.

The three side by side

PointTime Freeze Laser LCLR®Ultherapy PrimeThermage FLX
EnergyLong-pulsed 755 nm and 1064 nm laserMicro-focused ultrasound with imagingMonopolar radiofrequency
How heat is placedScanned across a zonePoints at set depthsVolume heating through a tip
Layers reachedDermis and superficial fatDermis, fat and SMASDermis and fibrous septa
FatSculpting mode, in selected zonesAlso reduces fat where deliveredNot aimed at fat
Settled fillerSculpting mode, after mappingNoNo
Tends to suitLaxity with a puffy or heavy lower face, compact fat, settled productStructural descent in a face of normal fullnessLoose skin alone, with normal fat and no product
Not planned forAn already lean zone, marked skin excess, freshly tanned skinLean or hollow faces, marked skin excessFat, hollowing or settled product, an implanted electronic device
NeckYes, with conservative settingsHas a role in structural descentHe uses Time Freeze and the VF Lift instead

Which suits which face

He reads the area, not the device list, and many faces need two.

What he findsUsually led byWhy
A lean or already hollow areaVF LiftPlanned for lean areas, where there is no fat to spare
A puffy or heavier areaTime FreezeTightening skin over a heavy pad leaves the heaviness in place
Settled fillerTime Freeze, after mappingHyaluronic acid is usually dissolved instead
Structural descent, normal fullnessUltherapy or HIFUFocused ultrasound reaches the SMAS
Loose skin aloneThermageThe problem is the skin envelope
Marked skin excessA plastic surgery specialistNo device removes skin

Other laser lifts you may hear about

Titanium lifting sweeps a triple-wavelength diode laser, at 755, 810 and 1064 nm, across the skin to warm the dermis. Fotona 4D uses Er:YAG and Nd:YAG lasers in four steps, one of them inside the mouth. Titanium lifting is not offered here, and Fotona 4D is not one of the protocols on this site. Both are different lasers from Time Freeze, even where a wavelength is shared.

A wavelength number alone does not define a treatment. Pulse duration, energy, the way heat is delivered and the protocol around it decide where the heat ends up, so two lasers that share 755 nm and 1064 nm can behave quite differently in skin. See titanium lifting vs Time Freeze.

“Thermage and Time Freeze heat the same layer. What I need to know is whether the skin is simply loose, or loose over something that should not be there.”

Dr Sin Yong

What the studies cannot tell you

No published trial has tested Time Freeze Laser LCLR® as a named protocol, or compared it with Ultherapy or Thermage. The long-pulsed laser literature looks at other settings and goals, so comparisons between the three rest on what each energy does, and on clinical judgement.

A systematic review found one case of subcutaneous atrophy in the published literature, and the other reports are unverified voluntary device reports, so no rate can be given. [7] It is still one reason Dr Sin Yong matches the device to how much fat a face has to spare.

If you have had one of these before

Having had one of these treatments does not rule out another. Dr Sin Yong asks what was treated, when, and what you noticed. He then looks at each layer: is it laxity, fat, settled product or lost volume? If an area looks hollower after treatment, it is assessed in person, and the discussion turns to restoring support.

Collagen remodels over months, so a view formed in the first weeks is often early.

What each one cannot do

Time Freeze cannot

Reach the SMAS, replace lost volume, remove skin or dissolve filler.

Ultherapy cannot

Add volume, change skin texture or treat settled filler. Dr Sin Yong does not plan it for lean faces.

Thermage cannot

Treat sagged fat or settled product, reach the SMAS, or remove skin.

None of them can

Relax neck bands, lift a true eyelid droop, or do what surgery does for marked skin excess.

Risks at a glance

Time Freeze

Tenderness where excess was targeted, and less often crusting or temporary darkening. Rarely a burn, blister, lightening, scarring or more fat loss than intended.

Ultherapy

Redness, tenderness, swelling, bruising or numbness for a time. Rarely a burn or temporary nerve weakness. Fat loss can read as hollowing.

Thermage

Redness, warmth and mild swelling. Rarely burns. Fat atrophy is listed among less frequent reactions.

All three

Screening differs: an implanted electronic device rules out radiofrequency, and a fresh tan postpones laser. Pregnancy, infected or inflamed skin and a recent course of oral acne medication also mean waiting for Time Freeze.

Frequently Asked Questions

None is ranked. They use different energy with different reach, and Dr Sin Yong performs all three. A lean face usually goes to the VF Lift, a puffy or heavier face to Time Freeze, and structural descent in a face of normal fullness to Ultherapy.
Yes. Ultherapy places points of focused ultrasound at 1.5, 3.0 and 4.5 mm, and the deepest reaches the SMAS. Time Freeze works in the dermis and the superficial fat, and it does not reach the SMAS. Depth alone does not decide, because the fault may not lie at the SMAS.
Neither has a mode aimed at settled filler. Time Freeze has the Sculpting mode, which is used on excess or settled product after ultrasound mapping. Hyaluronic acid is usually dissolved instead. We found no published study of long-pulsed 1064 nm laser on nodules from PCL, PLLA, CaHA or PDLLA. Reports of energy devices on nodules from these materials are few and at case level.
What a person notices depends on whether the energy suited that face, which layer was at fault, and how it was planned. Hollowing needs support, not heat. Fat or filler may be the weight. Marked skin excess needs surgery. The change may be judged too early. These devices do what they are built to do, and matching them to the face matters.
It has been reported, and no rate can be given. Focused ultrasound can also reduce fat where it is delivered, and in a lean face that reads as hollowing. This is why Dr Sin Yong does not plan Ultherapy or HIFU for lean faces. Hollowing that has happened is assessed in person.
For most necks Dr Sin Yong uses the VF Lift and Time Freeze, because neck skin is thin and settings need to be conservative. Ultherapy has a role where there is structural descent. He does not use Thermage on the neck.
Yes, in a planned order. Time Freeze is most often paired with the VF Lift, each on its own zone. Ultherapy may be sequenced with one of these when a face has more than one finding, decided at review and not stacked on one day.
Recovery differs, and it varies between people. After Time Freeze, warmth fades within minutes and normal activities can continue, and the area can feel tender for a while where fat or filler was targeted. After Ultherapy, tenderness, swelling or numbness can last for a time. After Thermage, redness and warmth usually settle. Each has its own risks.
SY
Dr Sin Yong
MBBS (NUS) · MRCS (Edinburgh)
MSc Aesthetic Medicine (QMUL) · MSc Practical Dermatology (Cardiff)
Aesthetic physician registered with the Singapore Medical Council.

Let the face decide

Dr Sin Yong will examine each layer and tell you which energy fits, if any.

WhatsApp the Clinic

References

  1. Alam M, White LE, Martin N, et al. Ultrasound tightening of facial and neck skin: a rater-blinded prospective cohort study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2010;62(2):262-9. DOI · PMID 20115948
  2. Fitzpatrick R, Geronemus R, Goldberg D, et al. Multicenter study of noninvasive radiofrequency for periorbital tissue tightening. Lasers Surg Med. 2003;33(4):232-42. DOI · PMID 14571447
  3. Dover JS, Zelickson B; 14-Physician Multispecialty Consensus Panel. Results of a survey of 5,700 patient monopolar radiofrequency facial skin tightening treatments: assessment of a low-energy multiple-pass technique leading to a clinical end point algorithm. Dermatol Surg. 2007;33(8):900-7. DOI · PMID 17661932
  4. Hong JS, Park SY, Seo KK, et al. Long pulsed 1064 nm Nd:YAG laser treatment for wrinkle reduction and skin laxity: evaluation of new parameters. Int J Dermatol. 2015;54(9):e345-50. DOI · PMID 25515708
  5. Friedmann DP, Bourgeois GP, Chan HHL, et al. Complications from microfocused transcutaneous ultrasound: Case series and review of the literature. Lasers Surg Med. 2018;50(1):13-19. DOI · PMID 29154457
  6. de Felipe I, Del Cueto SR, Pérez E, Redondo P. Adverse reactions after nonablative radiofrequency: follow-up of 290 patients. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2007;6(3):163-6. DOI · PMID 17760693
  7. Humphrey VS, Rambhia PH, Gmyrek R, Chapas A. Microfocused Ultrasound With Visualization: A Systematic Review of Adverse Events and Risk of Subsequent Facelift Compromise. Dermatol Surg. 2025;51(4):424-429. DOI · PMID 39625163

Studies may involve other devices or protocols, and they do not predict your own result. See our evidence library and editorial policy.

Related Treatments

Last updated 6 November 2026. General information only. Results vary between individuals.