Cardiac MR image data is typically acquired over multiple cardiac cycles, thus necessitating the use of a synchronization algorithm. Comparison of such algorithms is challenging, as the MR environment distorts the signals that might be used to derive the gating signal for synchronization. In this study, we evaluated three cardiac synchronization algorithms by means of two full-reference image quality metrics and two no-reference metrics; we compared the resulting values of these metrics with subjective analysis by expert reviewers. Both full-reference metrics indicated that there was a statistically significant difference between the cardiac synchronization algorithms. However, both no-reference metrics indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between any of the synchronization algorithms, which corresponded with the subjective analysis. In conclusion, no-reference image metrics correlated well with expert analysis of cardiac MR images, while the full-reference metrics were most likely oversimplified which provided misleading results.