An understanding of the thermal gradient within the tissue during cryoablation is important to assure delivery of an “ablative dose” throughout the targeted region. Ablative dose is generally defined as freezing below −20 °C or −40 °C (cancer-type dependent), to assure complete lethality or risk an increased chance of cancer recurrence. Achieving this currently requires a significant amount of non-targeted tissue frozen to > −40 °C for a prolonged interval. Volumetrically, the amount of tissue exposed to > −40 °C, iceball periphery, exceed that of the targeted area. As such, a significant amount of non-targeted tissue is destroyed resulting in collateral damage and post-procedural complications. Given this, while cryoablation is an effective therapeutic option,there is a need for continued procedural improvement by providing quicker and more precise delivery of an “ablative dose” to improve targeted eradication with reducing collateral tissue damage. In an effort to improve cryoablation efficacy, a new cryodevice utilizing supercritical nitrogen (SCN) has been developed which has been reported to rapidly and precisely deliver a highly lethal “cryoablative dose”. In this study we investigated SCN ablative capacity using an in vivo like tissue engineered prostate (pTEM) and renal (rTEM) cancer model. Analysis of the lethal zones created by SCN following a shortened 5/5/5 min freeze/thaw/freeze protocol (SCN5/5/5) using 1.8 mm × 3 cm and 2.0 mm × 4 cm cryoprobes were conducted and compared to those created following the standard Argon-based 10/5/10 min protocol (Ar10/5/10). Ar10/10/10 data was compiled from both the EndoCare V-Probe (direct testing) and Galil IceEdge2.4 probe (literature report comparison). The objective was to determine if SCN could provide equivalent, or increased, cancer cell destruction in less time with smaller probes in a smaller frozen volume supporting delivery of a more lethal cryogenic insult. Assessment following SCN5/5/5 freezing of the TEM’s revealed the formation of a 3.1 cm and 3.9 cm diameter iceball following the 1st and 2nd freeze, respectively, whereas Ar10/5/10 yielded an average diameter of 3.7 cm and 4.4 cm, respectively. Volumetric comparison revealed the SCN yielded a ∼23% smaller iceball (30.1 cm3 vs. 38.8 cm3, respectively). Isothermal assessment demonstrated deeper penetration of the −40 °C isotherm with SCN compared to Ar yielding a steeper thermal gradient within the tissue (SCN vs. Ar; pTEM = 2.1 cm vs. 1.8 cm and rTEM = 2.02 cm vs. 1.87 cm). Assessment of cell death revealed similar outcomes between the protocols (pTEM = 3.0 cm and rTEM = 3.8 cm lethal zone). Correlation of cell destruction to frozen volume demonstrated SCN yielded a 30% (pTEM) and 50% (rTEM) increase in lethality compared to Ar. The results of this study suggest that SCN provides a more lethal cryogenic insult within the frozen mass thereby resulting in improved cancer cell destruction compared to that attained with commercially available Ar. Further, SCN allowed for a reduction in probe size and procedure time while decreasing the level of damage to surrounding non-targeted tissue. As such, through the delivery of more lethal (colder) ice in a more compact frozen tissue mass, a reduction in procedure time, risk of reoccurrence and damage to non-targeted tissues, such as the neurovascular bundles, collecting ducts, rectum, etc., may be achieved.