Amethyst vs Cubic zirconia
Cubic zirconia is harder (Mohs 8–8.5) than Amethyst (Mohs 7), so it resists scratching better.
Cubic zirconia has the higher refractive index (2.15–2.18 vs 1.544–1.553), which a refractometer (over-the-limit reading) can use to separate them.
Cubic zirconia is denser (SG 5.8 vs 2.65); a cubic zirconia of the same size weighs about 119% more.
Advertisement
Ad space (in-content)
| Property | Amethyst | Cubic zirconia |
|---|---|---|
| Species / material | Quartz | Synthetic zirconium oxide |
| Mohs hardness | 7 | 8–8.5 |
| Refractive index | 1.544–1.553 | 2.15–2.18 |
| Specific gravity | 2.65 | 5.8 |
| Crystal system | Trigonal | Cubic |
| Birefringence | 0.009 | None (isotropic) |
Values are typical ranges from standard gemmological references; individual stones can vary.
Test it yourself
More comparisons
Diamond vs AmethystDiamond vs Cubic zirconiaRuby vs AmethystRuby vs Cubic zirconiaSapphire vs AmethystSapphire vs Cubic zirconiaEmerald vs AmethystEmerald vs Cubic zirconiaAquamarine vs AmethystAquamarine vs Cubic zirconiaMorganite vs AmethystMorganite vs Cubic zirconiaAlexandrite vs AmethystAlexandrite vs Cubic zirconiaSpinel vs AmethystSpinel vs Cubic zirconia