Peridot vs Cubic zirconia
Cubic zirconia is harder (Mohs 8–8.5) than Peridot (Mohs 6.5–7), so it resists scratching better; Peridot is softer than quartz dust (7) and needs more care in everyday rings.
Cubic zirconia has the higher refractive index (2.15–2.18 vs 1.654–1.690), which a refractometer (over-the-limit reading) can use to separate them.
Cubic zirconia is denser (SG 5.8 vs 3.34); a cubic zirconia of the same size weighs about 74% more.
Advertisement
Ad space (in-content)
| Property | Peridot | Cubic zirconia |
|---|---|---|
| Species / material | Olivine (forsterite) | Synthetic zirconium oxide |
| Mohs hardness | 6.5–7 | 8–8.5 |
| Refractive index | 1.654–1.690 | 2.15–2.18 |
| Specific gravity | 3.34 | 5.8 |
| Crystal system | Orthorhombic | Cubic |
| Birefringence | 0.035–0.038 | None (isotropic) |
Values are typical ranges from standard gemmological references; individual stones can vary.
Test it yourself
More comparisons
Diamond vs PeridotDiamond vs Cubic zirconiaRuby vs PeridotRuby vs Cubic zirconiaSapphire vs PeridotSapphire vs Cubic zirconiaEmerald vs PeridotEmerald vs Cubic zirconiaAquamarine vs PeridotAquamarine vs Cubic zirconiaMorganite vs PeridotMorganite vs Cubic zirconiaAlexandrite vs PeridotAlexandrite vs Cubic zirconiaSpinel vs PeridotSpinel vs Cubic zirconia