Background: We aimed to compare cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) utilization and radiation exposure during prostatic artery embolization (PAE) procedures on two different angiography systems. Methods: PAEs performed by a single interventionalist between January 2018 and October 2020 on two multivendor angiography systems (AS1 and AS2) at a single center were retrospectively evaluated. Imaging techniques included CBCT acquisition when possible, predominantly from the distal aorta in AS1 and from the bilateral internal iliac arteries in AS2 (Discovery IGS 740, GE HealthCare, Chicago, IL). Baseline demographics, CBCT utilization and radiation doses, and total procedure radiation metrics for each group were collected and compared. Results: One hundred and twenty patients were analyzed in this study, with fifty-three patients (n = 25 in AS1, 28 in AS2) included as embolized bilaterally using CBCT. CBCT was acquired in 31% of the cases in AS1 and in 85% of the cases in AS2. Mean prostate volume was similar in both groups (103.0 mL vs. 130.1 mL, p = 0.23). There was no difference in fluoroscopy time, while the number of DSA series and CBCTs per case did differ in AS1 and AS2 (37.3 min vs. 32.1 min, p = 0.13, 19.8 vs. 8.0, p ≤ 0.001, 1.3 vs. 2.1 p ≤ 0.001). The mean total air kerma, total kerma area product and air kerma per CBCT were higher in AS1 compared to AS2 (2020.4 mGy vs. 490.3 mGy, p ≤ 0.001, 259.3 Gy*cm2 vs. 72.7 Gy*cm2, p ≤ 0.001 and 217.8 mGy vs. 45.8 mGy, p ≤ 0.001 respectively). To prevent confounding from a mean difference in body mass index, the data were adjusted using log outcome means, which corroborated the raw data findings. Conclusions: The mean procedural total kerma area product from AS1 was similar to that reported in other PAE studies, but it was substantially lower in AS2. The angiography system used has a significant impact on the ability to leverage CBCT and on overall patient and thus staff radiation exposure.