The aim of the present study was to compare the capacity of three dissimilar commercially accessible desensitizing products for the occlusion of dentinal tubules using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The nondiseased human mandibular premolar teeth, ninety in number, were amassed for this study. The blocks subsequently made were subjected to polishing using abrasive paper to facilitate dentinal surface exposure. The samples were randomly allocated to one of the following three groups: Group I, samples to be treated with Admira Protect; Group II, samples to be treated with MI paste, Group III, samples to be treated with Remin Pro. Photomicrograph of every sample was taken to evaluate the occlusion of the dentin tubule under 2000× magnification of the SEM. MI paste exhibited the greatest dentin tubular occlusion with a value of 2.746 ± 0.530 followed by Admira Protect (3.498 ± 0.202) and Remin Pro (4.594 ± 0.364) in that order. Amid the various desensitizing materials used, statistically significant differences (p <0.001) were noted. Within the confines of the limitations of the present research, following a comparative assessment of the three desensitizing materials used, it can be concluded that all of them were efficient in sealing off the dentin tubules in spite of differing chemical constitutions and techniques of application. When compared with the agents, Admira Protect and Remin Pro, MI paste exhibited the maximum occluding capacity of the dentinal tubules. A short, sharp shooting pain characterizes the frequent problem of dentin hypersensitivity (DH). Sealing off the open dentin tubules, thereby reducing dentinal permeability, is a known method in the treatment of DH. As several agents exist to reduce DH, the best commercially marketed product for decreasing this condition by occluding the tubules should be identified by the clinicians.