The purpose of this study is to compare atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) with the conventional rotational restorative method (CM) to determine in both cases the total time required for the procedure, the cost, the presence of pain, and the behavior of pediatric patients in Peru. Of the 30 children selected for the study, half received ART and restoration with glass ionomer cement and the other half, CM and restoration with amalgam. The study parameters were the times required to remove the decayed tissue and to complete the entire procedure, the total cost of the procedure, the presence of pain, and the patient's behavior during treatment. Significant differences were found between the two techniques in all parameters, except for the patient's behavior. Although removing the decayed tissue was faster with the CM, the entire procedure was faster with ART, which, moreover, was significantly less expensive and less painful than the CM. The results indicated that ART is a very good alternative due to its low cost and acceptance by the children.