Aim- The aim of the study was to compare the primary stability of tapered and cylindrical implants and evaluate their impact on implant success, particularly in relation to loading protocols in implant dentistry. Materials and methods- The study involved 20 partially edentulous patients requiring implant-based teeth replacement, selected based on stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria. Eligible participants were systemically and periodontally healthy adults aged 18 to 60 years with adequate bone structure and sufficient keratinized tissue, willing to provide informed consent. Patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 received 20 tapered implants, and Group 2 received 20 cylindrical implants. Radiographic evaluations, including intraoral periapical radiographs and orthopantomograms, assessed bone architecture, while ridge mapping helped select implant dimensions. Pain levels were recorded based on patient-reported VAS scores, categorized as no pain, moderate pain, or worst pain, ensuring comprehensive postoperative evaluation. Data analysis was done using SSPS software. Results- The mean implant stability was compared between Group 1 (tapered implants) and Group 2 (cylindrical implants) at different follow-up periods. Immediately after placement, Group 1 showed a higher mean stability (60.345 ± 1.325) compared to Group 2 (57.892 ± 0.242), with a statistically significant difference (P = 0.001). At one month, Group 2 exhibited greater stability (69.828 ± 1.252) than Group 1 (65.637 ± 1.324), maintaining statistical significance (P = 0.001). By six months, Group 1 showed slightly higher stability (75.412 ± 1.003) compared to Group 2 (73.246 ± 0.721), with the difference remaining significant (P = 0.001). Conclusion- Tapered implants offer greater primary stability than cylindrical implants, enhancing predictability and success, especially with the increasing use of loading protocols in implant dentistry.