Objective This study aims to compare the accuracy of self-developed universal implant guide (SDG), 3D printed digital guide (DG), and free hand (FH) simulated implantation in the posterior tooth area of dental models. Methods Ten junior dentists were selected to place three implants in the 35, 37, and 46 tooth sites of the mandibular models (35, 36, 37, and 46 missing teeth) by using SDG, DG, and FH, and the process was repeated again to take the average value. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was used to evaluate the global coronal deviation, global apical deviation, depth deviation, and angular deviation between the actual position and preoperative planned position. Results The coronal deviation and apical deviation of the three implant sites in the SDG group were not significantly different from those in the two other groups (P>0.05). The depth deviation and angular deviation in the SDG group were smaller than those in the DG group (P<0.05) and FH group (P<0.05), respectively. All deviations at site 37 in the SDG group were not different from those at site 35 (P>0.05), while the depth and angular deviation at site 37 in the DG group were higher than those at site 35 (P<0.05). Conclusion The precision of the self-developed universal dental implant guide can meet the requirements of clinical posterior implantation.