Fifty-three histologically confirmed soft tissue masses in 48 patients were evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging (MR) and computerized tomography (CT). Twenty-three of these were malignant, twenty-three benign and seven of intermediate malignancy (all aggressive fibromatosis). The two procedures were compared for sensitivity and delineation of masses, their relationship to important neurovascular structures, their potential for histological diagnoses, their relative roles in influencing the surgical approach and the preferred modality in the follow-up for detection of tumor recurrence. Both modalities have their relative strengths and weaknesses. However, the superior contrast resolution of magnetic resonance imaging, its demonstration of lesions not clearly identified by CT, its pluridirectional capabilities and its ability to demonstrate large soft tissue tumors in a single coronal or sagittal plane makes it the preferred initial modality for evaluation of the soft tissue tumor of uncertain etiology and also in the follow-up of these patients. Despite MR's superiority in anatomically staging soft tissue tumors it, like CT, is of limited value in characterizing soft tissue sarcomas.