Purpose: Heat pressed ceramics, used for all ceramic restorations, have the additional advantage of being technically less change through using of the lost-wax technique. Conceptually, combining the ceramic with the clinically proven reinforcing ability of a metal framework would be advantageous; however, cause of mismatching of fusion between ceramics and metal frameworks which from differences of casting temperature and coefficient of thermal expansion, pressed ceramics could not be used with a metal framework. The purpose of this study was to compare shear bond strength of press-to metal ceramic to porcelain fused non precious metal and feldspatic porcelain fused non precious metal. Methods: The 30 metal specimens were casted in a porcelain fused non precious metal nickel-chromium alloy. They were divided into 3 groups by surface treatment and applied ceramic: $125{mu}m$ aluminium oxide sandblasting and veneered feldspatic porcelain (group FP), $125{mu}m$ aluminium oxide sandblasting and had press-to-metal ceramic applied (group PC), porcelain bonder (gold bonder) fused on surface of metal specimens and had press-to-metal ceramic applied (group PCG). In each group 10 metal specimens were used. The press-to-metal ceramic applied 20 specimens had ash-free wax pattern applied, the metal-wax complexes invested, and were pressed with heat press ceramic. All specimens were subjected to shear bond strength test at a crosshead speed of 1.0 mm/min. Results: The results of measured in Mean SD and data were analyzed by one-way AVOVA (p= .05) and Tukey HSD test (p= .05).: group FP $16.090{pm}1.841$ MPa, group PC $12.620{pm}1.8256$ MPa, group PCG $10.920{pm}0.9283$, significant differences between all groups (p < .05). Significant differences were found in each between group FP and group PC, group FP and group PCG (p < .05). Conclusion: The shear bond strength of press-to-metal ceramic to porcelain fused non precious metal was described higher in unused gold bonder group than used gold bonder groups.