This study aimed to assess the ability of modern resin-based “bioactive” materials (RBMs) to induce dentine remineralisation via mineral deposition and compare the results to those obtained with calcium silicate cements (CSMs). The following materials were employed for restoration of dentine cavities: CSMs: ProRoot MTA (Dentsply Sirona), MTA Angelus (Angelus), Biodentine (Septodont), and TheraCal LC (Bisco); RBMs: ACTIVA BioACTIVE Base/Liner (Pulpdent), ACTIVA Presto (Pulpdent), and Predicta Bioactive Bulk (Parkell). The evaluation of the mineral deposition was performed through scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) on the material and dentine surfaces, as well as at the dentine–material interface after immersion in simulated body fluid. Additionally, the Ca/P ratios were also calculated in all the tested groups. The specimens were analysed after setting (baseline) and at 24 h, 7, 14, and 28 days. ProRoot MTA, MTA Angelus, Biodentine, and TheraCal LC showed significant surface precipitation, which filled the gap between the material and the dentine. Conversely, the three RBMs showed only a slight ability to induce mineral precipitation, although none of them was able to remineralise the dentine–material interface. In conclusion, in terms of mineral precipitation, modern “bioactive” RBMs are not as effective as CSMs in inducing dentine remineralisation; these latter represent the only option to induce a possible reparative process at the dentin–material interface.