Objectives To evaluate and compare the average surface roughness of an auto glazed, reglazed and chair side polished surface of three commercial brands of feldspathic porcelain. Materials and method Three feldspathic porcelain, namely VITA VMK94 (Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad Sachingen, Germany), Ceramco3 (DETSPLY International Inc. Germany) and SHOFU VINTAGE Halo (SHOFU INC. Kyoto Japan) were selected to fabricate 30 specimens each. A medium–grit diamond rotary cutting instrument was used to remove the glaze layer, and then 10 specimens from each group were randomly selected and re–glazed and similarly 10 specimens from each group were polished using a well–defined sequence of polishing comprising of: Shofu porcelain polishing system, White gloss disc/polishing wheel and finally with small buff wheel with pumice slurry. Results The surface roughness of the specimens (Ra values) were measured using surface profiler and values were The results show that there is no statistically significant difference between the surface roughness of reglazed and chair–side polished surface. In addition, both reglazed and chair–side polished surfaces are better than the auto glazed surface. Conclusion Polishing an adjusted porcelain surface with the suggested sequence of polishing will lead to a finish similar to a re–glazed surface. Therefore chair–side polishing can be a good alternative to reglazing for finishing adjusted porcelain surface. Clinical significance This study establishes that chair side polishing renders the surface of the porcelain a lot less rough than reglaze or auto glaze. Lesser the surface roughness lesser is the wear caused and hence lesser is the plaque accumulation.