3.2ct Asscher (9×9×5.85 mm) vs 3ct Cushion (10×8×5.12 mm)
Diamond Size Comparison
Actual size is set for screen
Change
sample image
|
vs. |
sample image
|
|||||||||
| 3.2 ct Asscher (9×9×5.85mm) | 3 ct Cushion (10×8×5.12mm) |
Cutting style
Step cut
(modified) brilliant
Weight
3.2 ct
3 ct
Measurements
9×9×5.85 mm
10×8×5.12 mm
L/W ratio
1
1.25
Face-up size
Inadequate
Borderline
This diamond is a SPREAD CUT!
This diamond is borderline SPREAD CUT!
Actual diamond size
Before purchasing a diamond, one should make sure it looks its weight.
It's important to understand that
carat weight does not equal face-up size.
Two diamonds of exactly the same weight (and shape) can vary quite considerably in face-up size. This depends on the proportions of the cut (e.g., deep cuts will face up smaller).
Here you can see the actual sizes of 3.2ct Asscher (9×9×5.85mm) and 3ct Cushion (10×8×5.12mm) as they would appear on a ring and finger.
Adjust the ring and finger size to get an idea of how these stones would look on your finger.
Two diamonds of exactly the same weight (and shape) can vary quite considerably in face-up size. This depends on the proportions of the cut (e.g., deep cuts will face up smaller).
Here you can see the actual sizes of 3.2ct Asscher (9×9×5.85mm) and 3ct Cushion (10×8×5.12mm) as they would appear on a ring and finger.
Adjust the ring and finger size to get an idea of how these stones would look on your finger.
Settings
|
Ring:
Skin tone:
Ring width: 3.0 mm
Saved...
|
|
64 mm |
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
Actual size is set for screen
Change
Face-up area is a measure of the size of the diamond
when viewed from the top (as set in a ring).
It tells you how big the diamond is at the girdle plane. It's important for a diamond to have sufficient face-up size for its carat weight.
It tells you how big the diamond is at the girdle plane. It's important for a diamond to have sufficient face-up size for its carat weight.
| 3.2ct Asscher (9×9×5.85mm) | |
| 3ct Cushion (10×8×5.12mm) | |
| Difference: 2.52mm² (3%) |
3.2 carat Asscher (9×9×5.85mm) has approx. 3% more face-up area than 3 carat Cushion (10×8×5.12mm).
To learn about the accuracy of these numbers, click here.
Quick Buying Guide
Diamond prices vary greatly as they depend on the combination of unique characteristics (4Cs - Cut, Color, Clarity, and Carat). For best value, it's important to choose the combination that will reduce the price without having a negative impact on appearance.
Each shape has its own recommended balance of qualities that will give you the most bang for your buck. Below is a quick buying guide to give you an idea, but for more detailed explanation, please see the complete buying guides for the respective diamonds (links below).
Each shape has its own recommended balance of qualities that will give you the most bang for your buck. Below is a quick buying guide to give you an idea, but for more detailed explanation, please see the complete buying guides for the respective diamonds (links below).
3.2ct Asscher (9×9×5.85mm)
3ct Cushion (10×8×5.12mm)
Min. clarity
VS or better
SI1 or better
Min. color (platinum setting)
H+
H+
Min. color (yellow gold setting)
I+
J+
Depth percentage
60 - 69%
59 - 70%
Table percentage
58 - 69%
56 - 70%
Length-to-width ratio
1.00 - 1.05
1.00 - 1.35
Min. polish/symmetry
Good or better
Good or better
Additional Info
3.2ct Asscher (9×9×5.85mm)
3ct Cushion (10×8×5.12mm)
Face-up size
Too large for 3.2 carat Asscher
A bit large for 3 carat Cushion
Facets
usually 58
usually 58
Length
9 mm
10 mm
Width
9 mm
8 mm
Depth
5.85 mm
5.12 mm
Gram weight
0.64 g (0.0226 ounces)
0.6 g (0.0212 ounces)
Points
320 pts
300 pts
Volume
181.82 mm³
170.45 mm³
Compare diamonds
Choose diamonds to compare:
Popular comparisons:
- 3.2ct Asscher (9x9x5.85) vs. 4.1ct Pear (13x9x5.49)
- 3.2ct Asscher (9x9x5.85) vs. 6ct Asscher (11x11x7.15)
- 3.2ct Asscher (9x9x5.85) vs. 4.75ct Round (11x11x6.63)
- 3.2ct Asscher (9x9x5.85) vs. 3.5ct Asscher (9x9x5.85)
- 3.2ct Asscher (9x9x5.85) vs. 4.1ct Oval (11x9x5.49)
- 3.2ct Asscher (9x9x5.85) vs. 3.9ct Cushion (10x8x5.12)
- 3.2ct Asscher (9x9x5.85) vs. 6ct Cushion (11x11x7.04)
- 3.2ct Asscher (9x9x5.85) vs. 4.2ct Pear (13x9x5.49)
- 3.2ct Asscher (9x9x5.85) vs. 4.1ct Pear (14.48x8.72x5.32)
Depth percentage for 3.2 carat Asscher (9×9×5.85mm)
Depth percentage of Asscher cut is the ratio of the total depth (measured from table to culet)
to its width. The total depth percentage of this diamond
is 65%, which is OK.
(Recommended depth percentage for Asschers is between 60% and
69%)
Depth percentage for asschers is calculated with the following formula:
Depth percentage for asschers is calculated with the following formula:
Depth % = (total depth ÷ width) × 100
3.2 carat
Asscher
(9×9×5.85mm) depth %:
Total depth: 5.85 mm
Width = 9 mm
Width = 9 mm
Depth % = (5.85 ÷ 9 ) × 100 = 65%
Depth percentage for 3 carat Cushion (10×8×5.12mm)
Depth percentage of Cushion cut is the ratio of the total depth (measured from table to culet)
to its width. The total depth percentage of this diamond
is 64%, which is OK.
(Recommended depth percentage for Cushions is between 59% and
70%)
Depth percentage for cushions is calculated with the following formula:
Depth percentage for cushions is calculated with the following formula:
Depth % = (total depth ÷ width) × 100
3 carat
Cushion
(10×8×5.12mm) depth %:
Total depth: 5.12 mm
Width = 8 mm
Width = 8 mm
Depth % = (5.12 ÷ 8 ) × 100 = 64%
About Depth Percentage
Depth percentage is one of the most important measurements as it plays a critical role in diamond's
appearance. If a diamond is cut too deep or too shallow, light leaks out, making
the stone less brilliant and fiery. Deep cuts also add hidden weight.
Diamonds that fall out of recommended depth range are generally less desirable and usually best to be avoided.
Diamonds that fall out of recommended depth range are generally less desirable and usually best to be avoided.
Face-up size evaluation for 3.2 carat Asscher (9×9×5.85mm)
The face-up size of this 3.2 carat Asscher
(9×9×5.85mm) is out of normal range for
3.2ct diamonds of this shape. Compared to 3.2
carat Asscher reference diamond, this diamond appears too big
when viewed from the top. You might think that's a good thing, however, it's not.
This is a so called spread cut.
A spread cut is a diamond that is cut to maximize spread instead of optimal light performance. If compared from above, it would look larger than a well cut 3.2ct Asscher. This is not a good thing. Spread cuts are typically too shallow, which allows light to leak out of the stone resulting in less light being reflected back to the viewer's eye.
Spread cuts usually look lifeless and flat, and can sometimes exhibit a fish-eye effect. They may also come with an extremely thin girdle which can easily chip.
A spread cut is a diamond that is cut to maximize spread instead of optimal light performance. If compared from above, it would look larger than a well cut 3.2ct Asscher. This is not a good thing. Spread cuts are typically too shallow, which allows light to leak out of the stone resulting in less light being reflected back to the viewer's eye.
Spread cuts usually look lifeless and flat, and can sometimes exhibit a fish-eye effect. They may also come with an extremely thin girdle which can easily chip.
The bottom line:
Spread cuts generally lack the brilliance and perfection that is
expected of a beautiful diamond. Don't be fooled into thinking that you're
getting a larger diamond for the money. This could be a rather flat, boring stone.
3.2 carat Asscher reference diamond
Since there are no specific ideal proportions defined for Asscher cuts,
an estimation formula is used to calculate the Asscher reference diamond.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Note: Asscher diamonds with face-up area of within 9% lower
and 12% higher than reference Asscher diamond area
are considered to be of adequate face-up size.
* Estimated Face-up area: Face-up area of Asscher cuts
is only an estimation (±5%). Due to uniqueness of each stone,
it's impossible to accurately calculate face-up area given only a diamond's measurements.
Face-up size evaluation for 3 carat Cushion (10×8×5.12mm)
The face-up size of this 3 carat Cushion
(10×8×5.12mm) is slightly out of normal range for
3ct diamonds of this shape. Compared to 3
carat Cushion reference diamond, this diamond seems a bit too large
when viewed from the top. This could be indicative of a spread cut, which is not a good sign.
A spread cut is a diamond that is cut to maximize spread. In this case, it would look larger than a well cut 3 carat Cushion when viewed from the top, however, this is usually not a good thing. Spread cuts are typically too shallow, which allows light to leak out of the stone instead of being properly returned back to the viewer's eye.
Spread cuts can look lifeless and flat, and can sometimes exhibit a fish-eye effect. They may also come with an extremely thin girdle which can easily chip.
A spread cut is a diamond that is cut to maximize spread. In this case, it would look larger than a well cut 3 carat Cushion when viewed from the top, however, this is usually not a good thing. Spread cuts are typically too shallow, which allows light to leak out of the stone instead of being properly returned back to the viewer's eye.
Spread cuts can look lifeless and flat, and can sometimes exhibit a fish-eye effect. They may also come with an extremely thin girdle which can easily chip.
The bottom line:
This diamond could be a spread cut. Caution is advised, since spread cuts
usually lack the sparkle and perfection that is expected of a beautiful diamond.
3 carat Cushion reference diamond
Since there are no specific ideal proportions defined for Cushion cuts,
an estimation formula is used to calculate the Cushion reference diamond.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Note: Cushion diamonds with face-up area of within 9% lower
and 12% higher than reference Cushion diamond area
are considered to be of adequate face-up size.
* Estimated Face-up area: Face-up area of Cushion cuts
is only an estimation (±5%). Due to uniqueness of each stone,
it's impossible to accurately calculate face-up area given only a diamond's measurements.
Face-up Area per Carat
Face-up area per carat is calculated by dividing face-up area of the diamond with
its carat weight. It tells you how many square millimeters of the top surface area
a diamond is showing or would show for 1 carat weight. This can be useful when comparing stones
of similar weights as it tells you how much spread per carat you will get.
Note: Face-up size does not linearly grow with carat weight,
which means the heavier the stone, the smaller its face-up area per carat (e.g., 1ct stone will have
higher face-up area per carat than 2ct stone).
Face-up area per carat
for 3.2ct Asscher (9×9×5.85mm):
Top surface area = 74.52 mm²
Weight = 3.2ct
Face-up area per carat = 74.52 ÷ 3.2 = 23.29mm²/ct
Weight = 3.2ct
Face-up area per carat = 74.52 ÷ 3.2 = 23.29mm²/ct
Face-up area per carat
for 3ct Cushion (10×8×5.12mm):
Top surface area = 72 mm²
Weight = 3ct
Face-up area per carat = 72 ÷ 3 = 24mm²/ct
Weight = 3ct
Face-up area per carat = 72 ÷ 3 = 24mm²/ct
Enter your screen size (diagonal)
My screen size is
inches
Actual size is currently adjusted to screen.
If your screen (phone, tablet, or monitor) is not in diagonal, then the actual size of a diamond, ring and finger will not be shown correctly.
If your screen (phone, tablet, or monitor) is not in diagonal, then the actual size of a diamond, ring and finger will not be shown correctly.