Purpose: The objective of this research was to assess the quality, substance, and ease of reading of online information regarding the use of 3D printing in dental practices. Materials and Methods: The search term selected was ‘3D printing in dentistry’. The first 100 websites retrieved through the Google Search Engine based on this search term were reviewed. Duplicate websites, scientific articles, social media links, videos, advertisements, and broken links were excluded from our study. The quality of the websites analyzed in this study was assessed using the DISCERN tool and JAMA benchmarks, while their readability was measured using the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL). A significance level of p < 0.05 was established for the analysis. Results: The 75 websites reviewed were categorized into two groups: blogs and commercial sites. It was determined that commercial sites (N: 42) were the majority compared to blog websites (N: 33). Blog websites scored higher than commercial sites in the total DISCERN, DISCERN 1, and Q16 scores. In the JAMA criteria, the minimum sources criterion (n = 12) and the maximum authorship criterion (n = 71) were met. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of FRES and FKGL scores (p > 0.05). Conclusions: The quality of online information sources regarding ‘3D printers in dentistry’ worldwide is considered to be at a moderate level. The readability of the data is at a low level. There is a need for higher quality and highly readable websites about ‘3D printing in dentistry’.