AIMOF THE STUDY To compare the Remineralization potential of two different fluoridebased materials to a biomimetic based materials onartificially induced demineralized lesion by Vickers micro hardness test MATERIAL AND METHOD Hundred and eighty human permanents, matured and intact single rooted teeth were selected by direct clinical examination for the study. To simulate the first stages of subsurface enamel lesions, the samples were immersed in a demineralization solution for a duration of 72 hours. Each sample was cut in half lengthwise. Based on the remineralization agents utilized, the remaining half of each tooth sample was separated into four groups. There were fifteen samples in each group. There mineralization was carried for 1week,2-week,3week separately Group1–control and suspending the sample in artificial saliva7,14,21 days Group 2 – GC tooth mousse plus. The tooth samples were suspended in artificial saliva for7,14,21days Group3–Clinprotooth crème. The tooth samples were suspended in artificial saliva for7,14,21 days Group4–Curodontprotect. The tooth samples were suspended in artificial saliva for7,14,21days. Group 5- Pretreatment group (demineralized half of teeth).The micro hardness of samples was evaluated by Vickers micro hardness testing. One-WAY ANOVA test followed by Tukey's post hocanalysis was used for statistical analysis. Result - Vickers micro hardness value shows that highest amount of remineralization has occurred in Curodont Protect followed by ClinproTooth Crème and GC tooth mousse plus. Conclusion– Curodont protect dentrifice showed highest remineralization potential. This is attributed to its innovative self-assembling peptide (P11-4) causing biomimetic type of enamel remineralization. Second highes tremineralization was seen in clinpro tooth crème due to its fluoride combination with functionalized tricalciumphosphate. This was followed by GC tooth mouseplus